TV Tropes: Standard Sci-Fi Fleet

[starfury]

Dude, we only make up the names of this stuff. It's only there because a bunch of writers came up with them en masse first. We can only point them out. I don't see it as being any different than a biologist naming a species.

Chicken and egg problem, though in this case, the writers came up with them first though. all the tropes does is to point them out.

[Stark]

Holy shit Ford, did you see that? He missed the point AGAIN. At least we know now that yes just a tropaholic and can be safely ignored.

Remember writers 'came up with it' and it's not a post facto rationisation to make fat nerds feel like they're clever at all. That's why this space fleet article effortlessly exposes the commonalities!

[SAMAS]

Holy shit Ford, did you see that? He missed the point AGAIN. At least we know now that yes just a tropaholic and can be safely ignored.

No, it's a difference of opinion. I see what Ford is saying,. I'm just dismissing it as a bad thing. That's what I don't get.

Remember writers 'came up with it' and it's not a post facto rationisation to make fat nerds feel like they're clever at all. That's why this space fleet article effortlessly exposes the commonalities!

Dude, will you please get off your fucking high horse and either provide some actual criticism or get the hell out of this thread?

[Ford Prefect]

The trope wiki does encourage a form of intellectual laziness when it comes to analysis of literature. It gives the impression that all fiction is made up of interacting tropes, which is basically the only way you can interpret a whole bunch of people making huge lists of of tropes which they 'picked up' while reading/watching any particular story. Rather than discuss the themes behind a story or the motivations of characters or whatever, a 'troper' looks for devices that have been used in other stories before, no matter how tenuous the connection is. Usually the definition for any trope is quite broad so it can refer to characters who are wildly different but have a few familiar traits, which is how you can end up with Char Aznable and Adrian Veidt on the same list of 'Well Intentioned Extremists'.

[Stark]

No, it's a difference of opinion. I see what Ford is saying,. I'm just dismissing it as a bad thing. That's what I don't get.

It's sad that you say that because I simply don't think you understand at all. This is unsurprising, since you honestly think writers 'came up with' 'tropes' as tenuous as those you identified in your article.

Dude, will you please get off your fucking high horse and either provide some actual criticism or get the hell out of this thread?

Learn to fucking read, dickshit. I provided criticism from the first post on. You just don't like it because you're a fannish lazy goit. Frankly, however, asking for criticism about a tvtropes article is a waste of time - your article was inaccurate, forced, biased and simplistic, but it's not like that means it's not good enough for tvtropes.

I enjoy it when you impotently rave, however.

[Connor MacLeod]

The article

I know it may have some accuracy issues. After all, I wrote it, and even then I knew it was a basic framework.

Anything else I should add?

I dont see why you bothered. I understand that alot of people like to do this, but it really just reminds me of SB's old habit of trying to simplify things by "categorizing" sci fi powers into some sort of organizationla chart. The problem there is the same as here, by what criteria are you categorizing them by? Any attempt at the sort of comprehensive categorization that would be needed for such a genuine chart would be complicated beyond belief (you have to basically compare/analyze every technology every unverse has, and then somehow assign an abritrary value for capability or absence of technology which would then be totaled up to assign such people a position.)

But that would pretty much simplify/end any vs debates (save for fanboys) and it wouldn't be something that 90% of forum folk (even on here) could be bothered with because its TOO complex and too time consuming. Even someone like myself doing my 40K analysis, I'm not doing THAT comprehensive a job, because my knowledge is limited and despite all I've covered, I'm still BARELY scratching the surface. I can easily see myself doing this for many years (DecadES?) to come, and there may well come a point where I get bored with it.

I realize that alot of sci fi analysis tends to get "dumbed down" for alot of people to understand, but I have come to dislike this simply because people then assume that if it can be "dumbed down" that's all there is to it and thats all people have to concern tehmselves with. Then you end up missing/ignoring important details. (like focusing on "enerrgy" to the exclusion of all else, such as force/momentum.)

[Stark]

Shit Connor, you just reminded me about those ordered lists of scifi empires by 'power level'. Remember when people cross-posted them here and at SB? Those were the days.

[Ford Prefect]

The Force Chart stuff is pretty wild. They're making a new one now. Based on 'niceness'.

[Formless]

Based on 'niceness'.

What does that even mean?

[Junghalli]

Based on 'niceness'.

What does that even mean?

They're trying to order different fictional cultures from least evil/unpleasant to most evil/unpleasant, basically.

[Connor MacLeod]

"niceness" can make some sense at least since its specific. That assumes you have halfway intelligent people doing it and you have some objective standard to go by.

[Havok]

You just reminded me of this scene:

Gargoyle elder: Must you humans name everything? Nothing's real to you 'til you've named it, given it limits.
Elisa Maza: It's not like that. It's just that, well... uh... things need names.
Gargoyle elder: Does the sky need a name? Does the river?
Elisa Maza: The river's called the Hudson.

The sky's name is ... the sky. Otherwise the elder gargoyle would just call it the big blue thing that gets dark sometimes above me. Names are just a common description so that you don't have a conversation like this...

"I'm going to see the elder gargoyle."
"Which one?"
"The one over there."
"There are five different elder gargoyles that way you are pointing."
"The one by the river"
"Which river? "
"The one with the fish"
"Uh... which fish?"
"The ones the bears eat."
"The brownish bears or the blackish bears?"
"Brownish."
"He moved."
"He did?"
"Yes."
"When?"
"A while ago."
"Do you know where he is now?"
"By a river."

Just sayin'.

[SAMAS]

The trope wiki does encourage a form of intellectual laziness when it comes to analysis of literature. It gives the impression that all fiction is made up of interacting tropes,

Tropes, Characters, Settings, Plots, Events, all kinds of stuff.

which is basically the only way you can interpret a whole bunch of people making huge lists of of tropes which they 'picked up' while reading/watching any particular story.

Well, several stories of varying interest.

Rather than discuss the themes behind a story or the motivations of characters or whatever, a 'troper' looks for devices that have been used in other stories before, no matter how tenuous the connection is. Usually the definition for any trope is quite broad so it can refer to characters who are wildly different but have a few familiar traits, which is how you can end up with Char Aznable and Adrian Veidt on the same list of 'Well Intentioned Extremists'.

Because those subtleties are what makes the shows interesting. (especially after, as we put it: TV Tropes Ruins Your Life) I mean yeah, we can make long essays on the primary differences between two guys who may have high goals but do terrible things to achieve them, but we're not trying to be that specific. Because those differences are why we watch and read and play. Its not a matter of a tenuous connection, but rather a broad category. We occasionally have more narrower focuses, but only when it happens a lot of times (and preferably over different media).

But keep in mind that a single character can (and good ones do) contain all kinds of tropes and characterizations. To list a character in the article for a single trope does not mean that's all he or she is. If you do a text search of that character (or check their name under the Character sheet for that series, if it has one), you'll find a large list of tropes and character types that person encompasses. Saying that cheapens a character is like saying mankind was cheapened when we found out our bodies are just a collection of tissues and organs.

[SAMAS]

The article

I know it may have some accuracy issues. After all, I wrote it, and even then I knew it was a basic framework.

Anything else I should add?

I dont see why you bothered. I understand that alot of people like to do this, but it really just reminds me of SB's old habit of trying to simplify things by "categorizing" sci fi powers into some sort of organizationla chart. The problem there is the same as here, by what criteria are you categorizing them by? Any attempt at the sort of comprehensive categorization that would be needed for such a genuine chart would be complicated beyond belief (you have to basically compare/analyze every technology every unverse has, and then somehow assign an abritrary value for capability or absence of technology which would then be totaled up to assign such people a position.)

But that would pretty much simplify/end any vs debates (save for fanboys) and it wouldn't be something that 90% of forum folk (even on here) could be bothered with because its TOO complex and too time consuming. Even someone like myself doing my 40K analysis, I'm not doing THAT comprehensive a job, because my knowledge is limited and despite all I've covered, I'm still BARELY scratching the surface. I can easily see myself doing this for many years (DecadES?) to come, and there may well come a point where I get bored with it.

I realize that alot of sci fi analysis tends to get "dumbed down" for alot of people to understand, but I have come to dislike this simply because people then assume that if it can be "dumbed down" that's all there is to it and thats all people have to concern tehmselves with. Then you end up missing/ignoring important details. (like focusing on "enerrgy" to the exclusion of all else, such as force/momentum.)

Well, I'm not trying to be that specific. I'm certainly not trying to rank them in any way other than a basic appearance and how they tend to be used, and I'm certainly not interested in firepower.

[SAMAS]

Post semi-deleted. It's not worth it.

[VF5SS]

Actually, they showed up in Zeta and Double Zeta first.

Actually no, you're totally fucking wrong. The backpacks in SEED come from the backpacks from Dragonar. The Base Jabber and other shit is based on the Dodai from original Gundam anyway.

[SAMAS]

Did you just tell the guy who wrote the damn article he didn't know what he was saying?

Besides, Zeta game first, and the Dragonar packs would then be inspired by the Mk II + G-Defenser Super Gundam. That falls more under the Mecha Expansion Pack article.

[VF5SS]

I take it back, putting a set of backpack wings showed up in sketches for Layzner first, but was never used in a show until Dragonar had them and then they showed in SEED the most recently. The Super Gundam is nothing like that. It's a backpack airplane. Its closet relative is the G-Falcon and O-Raiser.

Stop being wrong.

[Samuel]

Based on 'niceness'.

What does that even mean?

They're trying to order different fictional cultures from least evil/unpleasant to most evil/unpleasant, basically.

http://forums.spacebattles.com/showpost ... count=2174

[SAMAS]

I take it back, putting a set of backpack wings showed up in sketches for Layzner first, but was never used in a show until Dragonar had them and then they showed in SEED the most recently. The Super Gundam is nothing like that. It's a backpack airplane. Its closet relative is the G-Falcon and O-Raiser.

Stop being wrong.

Never!

[Axiomatic]

I don't think that providing resources for literary analysis appears particularly high on the TvTropes agenda, so blaming them for intellectual laziness on that part is kind of...weird.

[Commander 598]

Actually, they showed up in Zeta and Double Zeta first.

Actually no, you're totally fucking wrong. The backpacks in SEED come from the backpacks from Dragonar. The Base Jabber and other shit is based on the Dodai from original Gundam anyway.

The mid-UC rocket sleds actually make sense though, unlike the Dodai (Which they barely acknowledge these days) and it's bastard descendant in SEED, the Guul.

[VF5SS]

Hey, Dodais were in the intro to Rise from the Ashes and they're in every Giren's Greed. I also don't see who the Dodai is "barely acknowledge" when the entire premise is using sub flight platforms accounts for lots of combat in Zeta. Really the only functional difference is the Mobile Suit doesn't just stand on the Dodai, but crouches down and grabs on.

[Commander 598]

Hey, Dodais were in the intro to Rise from the Ashes and they're in every Giren's Greed. I also don't see who the Dodai is "barely acknowledge" when the entire premise is using sub flight platforms accounts for lots of combat in Zeta.

Games never count (Especially not Gihren's Greed with almost literally a dozen different Gyan variants and a Zeon Gundam, and honestly Rise From the Ashes had Magella turrets pulling more Gs than F22s), and when was the last time you saw it in a series? 08th Team, so blacked out you almost couldn't even see them and definitely not performing the job we're discussing. Even MS Era had Gaws doing bombing work rather than put a Dodai in it, even though it's supposedly a bomber. They're much saner in Zeta as well, being that they seem to low altitude hover on minovsky craft systems instead of being a plane with mecha footholds.

Really the only functional difference is the Mobile Suit doesn't just stand on the Dodai, but crouches down and grabs on.

[VF5SS]

Like I said, the functional difference between the old Dodais and the new ones is that the Mobile Suit doesn't stand up. And the Jobbers in Zeta don't function on minovsky craft since this was before any miniaturization of that technology existed. They appear to fly on a combination of thrust and lifting body design. I still don't see how the Dodai is barely acknowledge (your 08th MS team example covers practically every miscellaneous cameo anyway) since the entire concept played a strong role in Zeta.