Page 2 of 2

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 1:35 pm
by Captain Seafort
Griffin wrote:Genuine query, I don't want to get into this argument, but couldn't that one just be closer?


If it were a closer ISD then it's stern would be much fatter. Instead it's approximately the same thickness all along its length. Besides, the comm ship is identified in the novel as "one of the larger destroyers", which indicates that it can't be an ISD.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:01 pm
by Griffin
Okay then.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:47 pm
by Captain Seafort
No worries. One of the biggest problems with the EU is its tendency to focus on snubfighter and light warship ops. This is understandable, given that that's the scale that the rebellion generally operated on, but it does mean that there's a serious lack of information (and some outright disinformation) about the heavier ships in both the rebel and Imperial fleets. If you go by the films the ISD behaves as little more than a customs ship, the Ex is a 10+ mile monster, the bulk of the Mon Cal fleet comprises two clearly identifiable (and very similar) classes, Home One is about 4 km long, and TIEs are dangerous (and shielded) opponents. If you go by the EU the ISD is something exceptional, the Ex is only five miles long (this, at least, as since been fixed), all Mon Cal ships are unique, Home One is little more than an average Mon Cal ship, and TIEs are nothing but cannon fodder. It's ridiculous.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 1:58 pm
by Praeothmin
Captain Seafort wrote:and TIEs are dangerous (and shielded) opponents.


They are dangerous, but their shields are weak at best, and they are cannon fodder...
The only times we see them last long is when they outnumber the opposition, else they get killed quite rapidly...

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:43 pm
by Deepcrush
Captain Seafort wrote:There's also another ship, intermediate in size between the Ex and the ISDs.


Oh, the unknown. Never heard anyone name it a comship.

Captain Seafort wrote:What are you talking about here? Given that there were three distinct types of MonCal at Endor (Home One-type, Liberty-type, and the wingless Liberty-type), all of which have been described as MC80, you'll have to be more specific.


We saw three MC80s, one which was destroyed.

Captain Seafort wrote:Not the far side of the planet, but on the opposite side of a hemispherical shell with the Death Star at its centre. How else do you expect the Imp fleet to perform its role of cutting off the rebels' retreat?


By doing exactly what they did in the films. Closing on the DS2's gravity field and trapping the Rebels between the moon, DS2 and Imp fleet.

Captain Seafort wrote:You did.


I would love you to show me where I said that, just to see what excuse you'll use to cover for your lying yet again.

Captain Seafort wrote:Indeed, but the individual weapons are far smaller than an ISD1's. It's the difference between being hit by a single tank shell and a lot of of MG rounds.


The turret placement is smaller, but I don't see a difference in the cannons themselves. There for 32 guns v 6 guns per flank. ISD2 is clearly the superior broadside ship.

Captain Seafort wrote:Note the term "directly contradicts". I've repeatedly pointed out the difference between the ships' formal designation and generic slang used to describe them.


Wrong, you pointed out what you wanted it to be after you got caught lying. You then spent time doing all you could to state we should ignore even the creator of the universe in question and accept your wikipedia based idea over that.

Captain Seafort wrote:I did nothing of the sort. I acknowledged that the image showed the bug getting hit. I theorised that the hit was less solid than it appeared, given that the discussion at hand was the relative strength of the GCS and Defiant, and I was sceptical of claims that the GCS was significantly weaker.


Just reread the thread, you did exactly that when focused on the Dominion Fighter. Check page three again and notice your statement to GKs response. You got caught lying yet again. Though it was nice of you to try and post from a different page to cover for yourself.

Captain Seafort wrote:Next to Home One. We can therefore use them to determine the length of Home One.


We can use them to estimate, however that estimation is simply that and not canon. The creators of the universe making a statement is however canon.

Captain Seafort wrote:The corvette image is square on in the vertical and horizontal planes, and the Lambda image shows it passing through the hangar door while square in the vertical plane, so we can indeed use both images to determine the length.


Having an external to internal view is meaningless for determining external size of a ship that isn't even in full view from another shot all together.

Just for a change of pace, it would be nice of you to try being honest rather then a walking joke.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:03 pm
by Captain Seafort
Deepcrush wrote:Oh, the unknown. Never heard anyone name it a comship.


The "main communications ship" was described as "one of the larger destroyers" in the novelisation.

We saw three MC80s, one which was destroyed


Like I said, they're all called "MC80", regardless of type, so I'd appreciate it if you we more specific. Given the numbers involved I assume you're talking about the Home One type.

By doing exactly what they did in the films. Closing on the DS2's gravity field and trapping the Rebels between the moon, DS2 and Imp fleet.


Indeed - in a hemispherical shell with the rebel fleet and the DS at the centre. They were holding position outside typical combat distance, going by Lando's confusion about on the fighters attacking.

Captain Seafort wrote:You did.


I would love you to show me where I said that, just to see what excuse you'll use to cover for your lying yet again.


You, earlier wrote:with naval combat, you can only fire by a line of sight


The turret placement is smaller, but I don't see a difference in the cannons themselves.


Look closer then.

Though it was nice of you to try and post from a different page to cover for yourself.


So I'm not allowed to concede points now am I?

We can use them to estimate, however that estimation is simply that and not canon. The creators of the universe making a statement is however canon.


Not when it contradicts higher canon.

Having an external to internal view is meaningless for determining external size of a ship that isn't even in full view from another shot all together.


Don't stupid. We get a nice continuous pan from constant range all along Home One's flank

Just for a change of pace, it would be nice of you to try being honest rather then a walking joke.


It would be nice for you to use that grey squishy thing inside your skull for something other than keeping your ears apart, but it's pretty clear that's never going to happen.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:12 pm
by Granitehewer
Without being a pest, I'd like to ask aside from the Home one and Liberty type Mon Cal cruisers what was the third type please?

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:39 pm
by Captain Seafort
Granitehewer wrote:Without being a pest, I'd like to ask aside from the Home one and Liberty type Mon Cal cruisers what was the third type please?


The wingless Liberty. It's a bit of a tricky one, as it's difficult to distinguish from HO at long range.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:24 pm
by Granitehewer
Aaaah thanks! I'll try looking for it although my eyes are shoddy these days.

Re: Mon Cal Star Cruisers

PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:56 pm
by Granitehewer
Got it!