StarDestroyer.Net BBS

CmdrWilkens wrote: No we don't. The problem here is that the ship's name is defined INSIDE the SW universe and outside considerations do NOT apply.

What about translation errors from the Basic?

Vympel wrote:Hey FTeik, I like the Superior-class (adds it down to the leadership-themed names ending with 'or' he's compiling).

I just want to let you know that I invented the Superior-class designation to my knowledge on ASVS several years ago to explain away the 8km SSD.

Connor MacLeod wrote:Stupid or not, its still canonically Imperial. You can't dismiss it without dismissing the validity of the ICS line, which still cuts your argument to pieces. People like Darkstar are the ones who arbirtrarily pick and choose from canon and official (and categorically dismiss things they don't like without good reason), not us. If you are going to dismiss Imperial when it has direct canon and official backing, you need some VERY good evidence to do so.

Who said dismiss? I've already laid out how they can be harmonized in a no contradictions way.

Vympel wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:Stupid or not, its still canonically Imperial. You can't dismiss it without dismissing the validity of the ICS line, which still cuts your argument to pieces. People like Darkstar are the ones who arbirtrarily pick and choose from canon and official (and categorically dismiss things they don't like without good reason), not us. If you are going to dismiss Imperial when it has direct canon and official backing, you need some VERY good evidence to do so.

Who said dismiss? I've already laid out how they can be harmonized in a no contradictions way.

Except its called Imperial-class in canon (OT ICS), and the Imperator classification is at best official. Are you arguign there are two separate class names for the same vessel? Or that the ICS is subordinate to the Mandel blueprints?

Your rationalization depended upon assuming that every single mention of 'Imperial-class' does not really refer to classification. We don't really *have* a contradiction, though, aside from the fact a certain number of people don't like the name.

Connor MacLeod wrote: Except its called Imperial-class in canon (OT ICS), and the Imperator classification is at best official. Are you arguign there are two separate class names for the same vessel? Or that the ICS is subordinate to the Mandel blueprints?

I'm saying that Imperial-class can be classed slang as it deserves to be, if Saxton is allowed to.

Your rationalization depended upon assuming that every single mention of 'Imperial-class' does not really refer to classification. We don't really *have* a contradiction, though, aside from the fact a certain number of people don't like the name.

I admit that- ever since ICS became canon that's the practical effect. Before that however I can and did argue the issue.

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:

Vympel wrote:Hey FTeik, I like the Superior-class (adds it down to the leadership-themed names ending with 'or' he's compiling).

I just want to let you know that I invented the Superior-class designation to my knowledge on ASVS several years ago to explain away the 8km SSD.

Congragulations, since that was such a big step in creative thinking (and it is still wishful-thinking on the side of us fan-boys, so it has no effort on the official or canon stand of LFL).

Ender wrote:

FTeik wrote:The Victory Star Destroyer is no KDY-ship.

Yes, it is. Rendelli is a sub corporation of KDY as confirmed by the NEGVV. I pointed this out to you in the first thread about classifying ships this week. The one you ran away from like a coward, remember?

At the time of AOTC it was still its own company, if we go with the canon ICS. I already stated this in the thread about classifying ships, but you obviously failed to notice that (no surprise, dense as you are). And i didn´t run away, but stopped posting, since everything i would have said was already told.

But if you want us again to start on the Republic-Class-Cruiser built by Kuat Systems VERSUS the Republic-Class-Stardestroyer built by RendiliStarDrive ...

Oh, and since we are at it: We still haven´t seen your NR Order of Battle, that would give each of a half dozen nearly identical ships its own place and purpose.
If you have something to show, do it, i´m not going to fight clouds of hot steam.

Vympel wrote: I'm saying that Imperial-class can be classed slang as it deserves to be, if Saxton is allowed to.

No it can't. If you want to get down and look at the facts. I'll walk through it.

1. The Mandel Blueprints which may or may not be officaly accepted by the holders of SW canon (I'm preaty sure Edam mailed Mandle about it one of the times this came up on ASVS and he got an explicit response back from the man himself saying they had no status with Lucasfilm at all) do not show the ship we know as an ISD. This is a simple fact given that the blueprints of the Imperator when put side by side with those of the ISD do not match. They come quite close true. But they are not the same ship. Then of course there is the fact that the ship is half the size of an ISD.

Thus by any standard of evidence, the ISD != the Imperator. Its simple. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME SHIP.

As such, there is no 'legal' or legitimate reason to claim that ISD stands for Imperator class Star Destroyer in face of the REST OF THE SW CANON HEIRACHY APPROVED BY LUCASFILM AND LUCAS HIMSELF which claims that the ISD stands for 'Imperial class'.

Further claims that Imperial is rebel slang do not hold water for several reasons.

One. If your claiming the Rebels call it an Imperial Star Destroyer because its part of the Empires fleet, it falls through on the grounds that they don't call any of the other Star Destroyer classes Imperial Star Destroyers, even when a mixed group of ISD's and other ships such as VSD's are present. Logically they would be calling them ALL 'Imperial Star Destroyers' but they explicitly refer to the other ships as Victory class or Super class or whatever. Also note that when the rebels capture ISD's they keep using the Imperial Star Destroyer class name rather then calling them Rebel/Republic Star Destroyers which they would have to for your theory to be logically correct

Two. If your claiming that Imperial is a slang for Imperator used by the Rebels then it also falls short. Imperial officers, many quite high ranking in the EU have used this designation. And using rebel slang is something that is highly frowned upon in the Empire at best. The idea that the professional officer corps would use rebel slang as a designation and not *ONCE EVER* used the proper class name is absurd at best. Also note that in many of the publications they are independent of Rebel influence. Such as the ICS, let alone the AOTC ICS. The fact that these don't even mention the Imperator even once is highly telling.

Three. The fact that the directly Lucas controlled SW.com website has kept the Imperial Class designation shows that they do not consider the Imperator to be the correct class name.

In short. If you want an in universe answer for this, its simple. The Imperator is an unseen and unproduced 600 meter long Star Destroyer that never went into any production that we have seen in the entire EU. The Imperial class went into production, a far scaled up design quite similar to the Imperator class in external looks.

If you want an out of universe answer, Mandels blueprints are simply unofficial first generation sketches made as they worked to produce Vaders cool starship, which eventually evolved into the Imperial class.

Either way, claiming the 'Imperator' name for the ISD as the valid one even before the AOTC ICS is utterly absurd. It would be the same as claiming that DS9's true name was 'Bajor Station One' which apparently was a draft name that appeared on some of the final design blueprints.

I.E., Imperator is wrong. Imperial is right. Period.

Ok I've said all I want to say or am going to say. You may not LIKE that people ignored what the Mandel blueprints said in favour of another name. But the fact is that THEY DID IGNORE IT! And so we have what we have. If Saxton was allowed to call it Imperator in AOTCICS then he would have done so. Not written Imperial into canon just so he can surprise two dozen people who know about this issue in ICS Epp III which he may or may not be doing.....

QED.

That's a very nice spiel, but you've totally missed the point- if Saxton can get "it's slang" in there, then it becomes slang. Period. That's the way canon works. I've already shown how it can be done, if he's allowed.

One. If your claiming the Rebels call it an Imperial Star Destroyer because its part of the Empires fleet, it falls

And where did anyone say that?

Two. If your claiming that Imperial is a slang for Imperator used by the Rebels then it also falls short. Imperial officers, many quite high ranking in the EU have used this designation.

Official material takes the form of historical documents that are flawed. Some argue that there's clear New Republic bias in them, and it shows. Even if they did, so what? Russian pilots call their Su-27s FLANKERs sometimes. Or their Pr.941s Typhoons. Is that 'absurd'? So much for that one.

Three. The fact that the directly Lucas controlled SW.com website has kept the Imperial Class designation shows that they do not consider the Imperator to be the correct class name.

Can I take this reason and say that the Exeuctor is 12.8km long then?

Either way, claiming the 'Imperator' name for the ISD as the valid one even before the AOTC ICS is utterly absurd.

No it's perfectly valid. Official is official, and simply pointing to one load of material that says Imperial means jack. Now that ICS is canon that's different, but I have no wish to go over it again for no reason, suffice to say I have no love of the concept of inventing new ship classes everytime someone gets the size wrong. As far as I'm concerned, every mention of an 8km/12km ship that just happens to be Super-class is an error, and they mean a 17.6km Executor. It's either obviously the intent, or cannot be an 8km ship for the purposes of the story (see the rationalisations section on SWTC for table). Considering that SW.com has already done that once with their cowardly modification of the Executor's size from 8 to 12km, I don't see why we must engage in such absurd gymnastics when Lucasfilm clearly doesn't feel the need. To illustrate the point further, I certainly don't subscribe to the idea that there's some sort of 15m high AT-AT around either. They got it wrong, and what they intended to portray is patently obvious.

Furthermore, the Mandel prints are official- Saxton got them with "property of Lucasfilm" or some such on them- I don't remember the story, it's on some old post. Anything that is not explicitly excluded from the Lucasfilm heirarchy is official (i.e. not infinities or whatever).

k I've said all I want to say or am going to say. You may not LIKE that people ignored what the Mandel blueprints said in favour of another name. But the fact is that THEY DID IGNORE IT! And so we have what we have. If Saxton was allowed to call it Imperator in AOTCICS then he would have done so.

We don't know whether he tried- as for ignoring- the WEG people responsible for this stupidity have ignored lots of things. Like ... the films. I have no love for the morons in any way shape or form- as far as I'm concerned everything they touch turns to shit.

It's getting remarkably tiring to watch the Mandelists argue their case by committing endless ad hominem on the writers of SW-WEG, who produced a remarkably excellent product over nearly fifteen years, and both maintained and increased the visibility and viability of the Star Wars license, which had lain fallow for over three years when they picked it up in 1987.

What about Wizards Star Wars D20? I know everyone seems to hate it but doesn't the fact that it is more recent put it higher than WEG information? I've always wondered this...

Iceberg wrote:It's getting remarkably tiring to watch the Mandelists argue their case by committing endless ad hominem on the writers of SW-WEG, who produced a remarkably excellent product over nearly fifteen years

That would be the remarkably excellent product chock full of disgusting ignorance of the films there stuff is supposed to be based on, huh? I suggest you look over the definition of ad hominem and come to the realization that WEG's habits are precisely the problem and a valid subject of debate in regards to this and other official issues.

and both maintained and increased the visibility and viability of the Star Wars license, which had lain fallow for over three years when they picked it up in 1987.

Visibility and viability of the license? I never even heard of WEG or any of their crappy RPG material until I started visiting SD.net, and I doubt that *any* new Star Wars fans were made by pouring over any of the poorly researched nonsense put out by some RPG house. I doubt the *huge* pen-and-paper RGP market saved Star Wars. It was Heir to the Empire that brought SW back in a big way- in the early 90s.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

Ender wrote:Please explain why KDY would subcontract something to a competitor, as opposed to a subsidiary like RHE if it is totally differnet as you say.

I don't have to. One doesn't contract subsidiaries because they're already part of the same company.

You were saying?

By definition a contractor is not a subsidiary.

Good thing it doesn't say they are a contractor then.

And this is in-line with AOTC ICS, in that the shipyard strings throughout the Outer Rim could give Rendili ascendance. KDY needed an escort for her Acclamators and contracted Rendili with her available shipbuilding infrastructure to build it while KDY was busy filling its RHE and sector fleet contracts.

Yes, except this is based of something that link proves wrong. So now you are back to having to explain why a company would flush money down the toilet by having a competitor build somethign for them. Escpecially in light of the fact that KDY is said to be extremely predatory in accuiring other companies.

EDIT: And Kuat IS a government as well. Perhaps with her shipyards filled to the brim with contracts, KDY contracted another company to build some destroyers KDY had designed to help with Sector defense and then the Republic in general adopted the vessel.

Kuat the government is seperate from Kuat Drive Yards. One rules the sector, one is a galaxy spanning organization. The two are not the same. While there is no doubt that a number of KDY executives serve or have served in the Kuati government, that is likely do to the fact that heads of a megacorporation will have sufficient power and resources at their disposal to squash any competition.

FTeik wrote:

Ender wrote:

FTeik wrote:The Victory Star Destroyer is no KDY-ship.

Yes, it is. Rendelli is a sub corporation of KDY as confirmed by the NEGVV. I pointed this out to you in the first thread about classifying ships this week. The one you ran away from like a coward, remember?

At the time of AOTC it was still its own company, if we go with the canon ICS.

And by the time of the Victory class it was not. KDY could easily take it over in the span of 3 years from when the clone wars started to when the Victory was roled out at their end.

I already stated this in the thread about classifying ships, but you obviously failed to notice that (no surprise, dense as you are).

And I already responded to this, yet you keep repeating it. Lovely wall of ignorance you have there.

And i didn´t run away, but stopped posting, since everything i would have said was already told.

Yes, and I shot it down. Now you are back repeating it again.

Oh, and since we are at it: We still haven´t seen your NR Order of Battle, that would give each of a half dozen nearly identical ships its own place and purpose.

I wne t through and showed you that the ones you claimed doubled up were infact different classes.

If you have something to show, do it, i´m not going to fight clouds of hot steam.

We debate. I shoot down all your claims. You then return, repeating shot down claims, and saying I just didn't get it. By anychance, do you live in Mississippi?

Vympel wrote:That's a very nice spiel, but you've totally missed the point- if Saxton can get "it's slang" in there, then it becomes slang. Period. That's the way canon works. I've already shown how it can be done, if he's allowed.

In which case you would have a canon contradiction because two sources with the same level of standing would say opposite things. Hell, I'd put money on the fact that even if he wanted to *(assuming he is writing another book) Saxton couldn't put that in due to internal politics in LFL (same politics that gave us 12.8 km)

You can wish and hope and pray all you want. But as it stands Imperial class is canon.

Ender wrote:

FTeik wrote:

Ender wrote:Yes, it is. Rendelli is a sub corporation of KDY as confirmed by the NEGVV. I pointed this out to you in the first thread about classifying ships this week. The one you ran away from like a coward, remember?

At the time of AOTC it was still its own company, if we go with the canon ICS.

And by the time of the Victory class it was not. KDY could easily take it over in the span of 3 years from when the clone wars started to when the Victory was roled out at their end.

Fine.

If i understand you correct, since the NEGVV we have to believe, that Rendili is a subsidiary to KDY and if you are right, this has been so since the clone-wars. Funny, that nobody thought that noteworthy before. If you have another source besides the NEGVV i don´t know about, please let me know.

And since we are at it: Could you provide the exact quotes from the NEGVV about the relationship between KDY and Rendili. I´m usually willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, but perhaps i have to change that policy.

And even if this will be kept up in the future (Rendili belonging to KDY) does this only prove, that the Victory is a KDY-design.

It proves nothing about the Republic-Class-HC being the same ship as the Republic-Class-SD.

I already stated this in the thread about classifying ships, but you obviously failed to notice that (no surprise, dense as you are).

And I already responded to this, yet you keep repeating it. Lovely wall of ignorance you have there.[/quote]

Just that the difference isn´t only in the nomenclature. I also provided a link to theforce.net, where the author of Destiny´s Way was answering questions, confirming, that he made up a new ship.

Interesting, don´t you think, if the Republic-Class-SD is already around since the BFC. I already stated this before, but obviously this escaped your notice. Now who of us is the ignorant one?

And i didn´t run away, but stopped posting, since everything i would have said was already told.

Yes, and I shot it down. Now you are back repeating it again.[/quote]

With shots you have already made and which i answered. Why should i continue a fruitless exercise? Or do you want us to discover who can outlast/outpost the other? I don´t know about you but i can do better.

Oh, and since we are at it: We still haven´t seen your NR Order of Battle, that would give each of a half dozen nearly identical ships its own place and purpose.

I wne t through and showed you that the ones you claimed doubled up were infact different classes.[/quote]

I never said they weren´t different classes, i said they were occupying the same position in an Order of Battle. How many ships do you need, that have four to six squadrons of fighters, around 2,000 troopers and comparable number of cannons?

If you have something to show, do it, i´m not going to fight clouds of hot steam.

We debate. I shoot down all your claims. You then return, repeating shot down claims, and saying I just didn't get it. By anychance, do you live in Mississippi?[/quote]

Oh yes? The first time you came up with the order of battle and a position for each of the NR ships in it, you didn´t thought it necessary to explain your grand sheme. That is hardly shooting down claims.
At the same time i had FOUR points, that indicated the Republic-SD and the Republic-HC to be different ships with ONE i couldn´t back up with a source, so you accused me of making claims i couldn´t back up. You were accusing me of something you yourself had just done. If that is not hypocritic, i don´t know, what is.

Ender wrote:
In which case you would have a canon contradiction because two sources with the same level of standing would say opposite things.

No, a contradiction would be one saying that it was only Imperial-class and one saying it was only Imperator-class. I've already laid out the optimal way of doing so with no contradictions.

Hell, I'd put money on the fact that even if he wanted to *(assuming he is writing another book)

I'd say that's a safe assumption considering he's already gotten two out there.

Saxton couldn't put that in due to internal politics in LFL (same politics that gave us 12.8 km)

I'm surprised that internal politics didn't nix his involvement in the first place, considering the scorn he heaps on poor research on his site, and his other controversial ideas (Endor holocaust).

You can wish and hope and pray all you want. But as it stands Imperial class is canon.

A most unfortunate side effect of the ICS canon quote, to be sure.

Vympel wrote:

Ender wrote:
In which case you would have a canon contradiction because two sources with the same level of standing would say opposite things.

No, a contradiction would be one saying that it was only Imperial-class and one saying it was only Imperator-class. I've already laid out the optimal way of doing so with no contradictions.

Hell, I'd put money on the fact that even if he wanted to *(assuming he is writing another book)

I'd say that's a safe assumption considering he's already gotten two out there.

AOTC ICS and what else? He was a reference for ITW2, but he didn't write it.

This entire Kuat Drive Yards vs Rendili sub-corporation argument is pointless. Ender's original statement assumes that even if Rendili is a subsidiary (not a competitor), therefore a KDY 'Star' prefix naming convention should apply. There is no reason why that should be so. For one thing, if we apply modern corporate law, Rendili is still a seperate company, subsidiary (wholly owned or not) or competitor.

I should also add that the mere fact that KDY subcontracted to Rendili doesn't necessarily mean it is a subsidiary company owned by KDY. It is neither here nor there to the matter.

AOTC ICS and what else? He was a reference for ITW2, but he didn't write it.

Ah see I haven't bought the second one yet.

FTeik wrote:

Ender wrote:

FTeik wrote: At the time of AOTC it was still its own company, if we go with the canon ICS.

And by the time of the Victory class it was not. KDY could easily take it over in the span of 3 years from when the clone wars started to when the Victory was roled out at their end.

Fine.

If i understand you correct, since the NEGVV we have to believe, that Rendili is a subsidiary to KDY and if you are right, this has been so since the clone-wars. Funny, that nobody thought that noteworthy before. If you have another source besides the NEGVV i don´t know about, please let me know.

I have proof that this is the case.. and this is not enough because you refuse to concede your argument? God this is fucking pathetic.

And since we are at it: Could you provide the exact quotes from the NEGVV about the relationship between KDY and Rendili. I´m usually willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, but perhaps i have to change that policy.

Oh, how cute, passive aggression since you can't create anything close to a decent flame.

NEGVV, page XIX wrote: When the old republic sought larger versions of its military assault ships, Kuat Drive Yards contracted Rendili StarDrive to manufacture the first Victory-class Star Destroyers, which set the standard for all Imperial Ships to come

Now if you want them to be seperate companies, you need to explain why a "highly predatory" (ref NEGVV) company would hire a seperate company instead of subcontracting to a subsidiary to do a job for them.

And even if this will be kept up in the future (Rendili belonging to KDY) does this only prove, that the Victory is a KDY-design.

As long as it is not contradiced by a higher source, it will stand. Now quit bitching just because you lack any sort of proof.

It proves nothing about the Republic-Class-HC being the same ship as the Republic-Class-SD.

It shoots down a large chunk of your evidence. Infact the only thing I've seen that would point ot seperate ships was provided by UIP, not you, and I have written WJW for further clarification

I already stated this in the thread about classifying ships, but you obviously failed to notice that (no surprise, dense as you are).

And I already responded to this, yet you keep repeating it. Lovely wall of ignorance you have there.

Just that the difference isn´t only in the nomenclature. I also provided a link to theforce.net, where the author of Destiny´s Way was answering questions, confirming, that he made up a new ship.

No, you didn't. You said he had done so, but never gave any link or anything, you just siad it was so and expected me to believe you were right.

Interesting, don´t you think, if the Republic-Class-SD is already around since the BFC. I already stated this before, but obviously this escaped your notice. Now who of us is the ignorant one?

Still you, because not only are you stupid, you are now a liar as well because you never posted a link to TFN.

And i didn´t run away, but stopped posting, since everything i would have said was already told.

Yes, and I shot it down. Now you are back repeating it again.

With shots you have already made and which i answered. Why should i continue a fruitless exercise? Or do you want us to discover who can outlast/outpost the other? I don´t know about you but i can do better.

Translation: I refuse to concede about the fact I lack any evidence, so claim victory and walk off.

Oh, and since we are at it: We still haven´t seen your NR Order of Battle, that would give each of a half dozen nearly identical ships its own place and purpose.

I went through and showed you that the ones you claimed doubled up were infact different classes.

I never said they weren´t different classes, i said they were occupying the same position in an Order of Battle. How many ships do you need, that have four to six squadrons of fighters, around 2,000 troopers and comparable number of cannons?

And I proved that your oversimplification was wrong, they all fell into seperate roles. What part of this do you not get?

If you have something to show, do it, i´m not going to fight clouds of hot steam.

We debate. I shoot down all your claims. You then return, repeating shot down claims, and saying I just didn't get it. By anychance, do you live in Mississippi?[/quote]

Oh yes? The first time you came up with the order of battle and a position for each of the NR ships in it, you didn´t thought it necessary to explain your grand sheme. That is hardly shooting down claims.[/quote]

Thread in question
Oh, look at that, I did infact assing the ships seperate roles. Meanwhile that theread has you tossing up red herrings, trying to dismiss evidence based on the author, and getting your ass handed to you by me, Connor, Wayne, and IP.

Changing history doesn't work when I just have to scroll halfay down the page moron.

At the same time i had FOUR points, that indicated the Republic-SD and the Republic-HC to be different ships with ONE i couldn´t back up with a source, so you accused me of making claims i couldn´t back up. You were accusing me of something you yourself had just done. If that is not hypocritic, i don´t know, what is.

Point out what I have claimed that I have not backed up. Unlike you, I post proof, I don't just claim I did when I didn't.


And learn how to use the fucking quote function.

Vympel wrote: I'm saying that Imperial-class can be classed slang as it deserves to be, if Saxton is allowed to.

No, it can't, unless you're arguing Saxton is of higher canon than the ICSs themselves (which you obviously are not.) At best, it would be equal to the previous ICS, and create two unpleasant contradictions (since it denies one canon classification already and steals from a separate vessel already classed Imperator-class.)

Aside from that, how the hell is Imperial-class slang? We're given no indication whatsoever that its wrong in ANY source (The MAndel blueprints technically don't count as a mile long destroyer.) And if we started allowing authors to "override" each other by slang, t hat means that we'd have ot accept any author (say of another ICS or VD or ITW book) who overrode another source just by calling it "slang", INCLUDING Saxton.

Besides that, have yo u ever even looked up what "Imperial" means?

Iceberg wrote:It's getting remarkably tiring to watch the Mandelists argue their case by committing endless ad hominem on the writers of SW-WEG, who produced a remarkably excellent product over nearly fifteen years, and both maintained and increased the visibility and viability of the Star Wars license, which had lain fallow for over three years when they picked it up in 1987.

Appeal to Popularity. I haven't said dick about WEG in this thread, but who gives a fuck if they kept SW visible and other stuff?

They turned out a poorly and incompetently researched product that was, a la Appeal to Authority, adopted as truth for the entire SW universe thereafter. An RPG school of thought dictated as verbatim truth.

But besides, who really cares? Your post is mostly superfluous.

Hmm.. the Executor was built at Fondor, even though its a KDY Design (supposedly. If we go with the "Super"-class being a separate warship, then this does not apply since the 17.6-km ship so far only exists in canon.)

Still, I have yet to hear of the Victory-class being directly attributed to KDY rather than to Rendili (this goes back a LONG way and has mucho precedence in alot of other sources - the EGV&V cannot contradict that.) - though it seems the EGV&V indicates that KDY began the construction of the first "Star Destroyers" with Rendili's help. We might assume that there were other STar Destroyers than just the Victory-class in production, and Rendili was contracted to produce the Victory-class ships, while KDY (and possibly other companies KDY enlisted the aid of) produced other ships.

Ender wrote:I have proof that this is the case.. and this is not enough because you refuse to concede your argument? God this is fucking pathetic.

BULLSHIT Ender.

It is not a subsidiary. KDY contracted another company to build a single vessel. That does not make said company its subsidiary.

The burden of proof is on you to justify that RSD is a subsidiary of KDY, that it continued to be for years, and is as of NJO. You HAVE NOT justified your leap in logic.

Ender wrote:Oh, how cute, passive aggression since you can't create anything close to a decent flame.

I don't blame him. You haven't, while simultaneously demanding direct proof about the Republic-class Cruiser != the Republic-class Star Destroyer (evidence I have since provided, by the way).

[i]The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels[/i] by W. Haden Blackman, pg. XIX wrote:When the Old Republic sought larger versions of its military assault ships, Kuat Drive Yards contracted Rendili StarDrive to manufacture the first Victory-class Star Destroyers, which set the standard for all Imperial starships to come.

[i]The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels[/i] by W. Haden Blackman, pg. 143 wrote:With the aid of Rendili StarDrvie, Kuat Drive Yards began producing Star Destroyers during the final days of the Old Republic.

Walter Jon Williams, Author of [i]The New Jedi Order: Destiny's Way[/i] wrote:The Republic-class cruiser is a new type, which I invented to fill a hole in the NR inventory. I envision them as being large, but highly-standardized and modular, so that they can be built quickly.

Walter Jon Williams, Author of [i]The New Jedi Order: Destiny's Way[/i] wrote:I reckoned the Republic-class cruiser to be slightly smaller than the MC80s, highly standardized and with fewer appointments.

Walter Jon Williams clarifies that the KDY Republic-class Cruiser has a LOA of under 1,200 meters, by virtue of the official LOA of the MC80 Cruiser (1,200 meters is the LOA of the Republic-class Star Destroyer, by the way), and is a "new type," unlike the RSD Republic-class Star Destroyer, which predates the New Class program.

You have failed to explain why KDY being aided in the production of the first Star Destroyers at the end of the Clone Wars or that KDY contracted another company, with a strategically placed string of shipyards in the warzones to construct the Victory-class requires that Rendili StarDrive be KDY's subsidiary. They have NOT specified such, and your circumstancial evidence does not require RSD to be KDY's subsidiary. It is a leap in logic.

Not that it matters. The KDY Republic-class Cruiser is not the Republic-class Star Destroyer.

Ender wrote:Now if you want them to be seperate companies, you need to explain why a "highly predatory" (ref NEGVV) company would hire a seperate company instead of subcontracting to a subsidiary to do a job for them.

He doesn't need to explain anything to you. You're making the claim (RSD must be KDY's subsidiary) now certainly it can be argued that RSD could have been one of KDY's subsidiaries during the Clone Wars, but it is not necessary, and is certainly debatable, and you haven't a scrap of information to claim that RSD was owned by KDY as of the NJO (keep in mind KDY split in many directions and lost much of its holdings according to the NEGtVV and the fact that factions both remained with the Empire, fled to Byss, and stayed on Kuat).

Now, Fteik and I don't HAVE TO fall on that conclusion, because there's nothing that says it. And any claims that it does are an unjustified leap in logic.

Ender wrote:As long as it is not contradiced by a higher source, it will stand. Now quit bitching just because you lack any sort of proof.

Provide explicit proof that RSD is KDY's subsidiary during the Clone Wars. Prove this continued onto the NJO.

Ender wrote:It shoots down a large chunk of your evidence. Infact the only thing I've seen that would point ot seperate ships was provided by UIP, not you, and I have written WJW for further clarification

Quite simply I've provided far more conclusive proof that the KDY Republic Cruiser is not the RSD Republic Star Destroyer. Different lengths, designed years apart, by different companies. They're NOT the same ship.

You're relying on circumstancial evidence and assumptions at best (the latter of which is based on an absurd all-post Endor NRDF ships-inclusive OOB, going against the letter of the text and outright ignoring many statements on the purpose and nature of the New Class).

Ender wrote:No, you didn't. You said he had done so, but never gave any link or anything, you just siad it was so and expected me to believe you were right.

Old history. I have provided the quotes, and any and all who wish to have the email forwarded to them may send me their email addresses.

Ender wrote:Still you, because not only are you stupid, you are now a liar as well because you never posted a link to TFN.[emphasis mine]

Don't be a hypocrite, Ender deary. Its not right to claim someone's a liar by lying yourself.

The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels

FTeik (10th Post from the Bottom) wrote:The thing about the Republic-Class-Cruiser as an easily mass-produced vessel was on theforce.net in the Authors and Artists-Section, Walter Jon Williams. The link is http: //boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=5816776&page=27.

Unfortunately it doesn´t say anything about the lenght of the vessel, but i´m sure i´ll find that again, too, given enough time. [emphasis mine]

I think you owe Fteik an apology for being an asshole and slandering him.

Ender wrote:Yes, and I shot it down. Now you are back repeating it again.

And you were wrong, Ender.

I still want a response myself, to both my PM and posts. I understand you like taking pot-shots at the Target here, but its quite unbecoming.

Ender wrote:Translation: I refuse to concede about the fact I lack any evidence, so claim victory and walk off.

Why should he concede? You're wrong. And to boot you've been slandering him and lying to facilitate it.

And you still have yet to respond to your total bullshit about the New Class. Connor bitchslapped you with it here (which amusingly shows you didn't read the sources before pontificating on your own agenda), but I'm sure you're too busy to respond... ...which, of course, is why you don't respond to my PM or posts, and instead pick on Target here, by lying about what he's done.

Ender wrote:And I proved that your oversimplification was wrong, they all fell into seperate roles. What part of this do you not get?

Many of which were wrong, such as your Republic-class BS, which totally ignored and contradicted official evidence which you threw out because it didn't fit your agenda in the CTD. WEG's XX-9 batteries are called "HTLs." Your absurd "Star Cruiser" assertion (which I find incredulous--a ship smaller than an ISD is supposed to support a dozen times as many guns? Aren't you the one who did the reactor volume to power output calcs?) is based on the unjustified assertion of assuming the RPG HTLs are the same type as the ISD HTLs on the ISD model, thus extrapolating the vastly-higher-than ISD firepower. You're playing the name game. "Heavy Turbolaser" doesn't say dick about firepower, which you need if you're going to claim quantitatively the RSD has as much firepower as a multi-mile long KDY Star Cruiser.

And again, that totally contradicts explicit information comparing the RSD to the ISD IN the CTD from which the HTL counts were extrapolating for your absurd calc. Picking and choosing, anyone?

Ender wrote:We debate. I shoot down all your claims. You then return, repeating shot down claims, and saying I just didn't get it. By anychance, do you live in Mississippi?

Except that you're wrong, and haven't conceded to me, Connor, and have lied about Fteik here.

Ender wrote:Changing history doesn't work when I just have to scroll halfay down the page moron.

Requote from Above wrote:

Ender wrote:Still you, because not only are you stupid, you are now a liar as well because you never posted a link to TFN.[emphasis mine]

The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels

Scroll down, Ender.

Ender wrote:Point out what I have claimed that I have not backed up. Unlike you, I post proof, I don't just claim I did when I didn't.

Yeah, and ignore it when Connor and I do.

EDITS 1 & 2: Wording and italicization mistakes.

Ender wrote:Now if you want them to be seperate companies, you need to explain why a "highly predatory" (ref NEGVV) company would hire a seperate company instead of subcontracting to a subsidiary to do a job for them.

Government mandate. For an example of something similar, the government was considering requiring Lockheed Martin to allow Boeing to help construct the F-35. It ended up not happening, but similar things have happened before. In WWII, Grumman Avengers were built by Ford because Grumman's factories were busy cranking out Hellcats and (later) Bearcats. If KDY's yards were full working on other ships, the VSD may have been sub-contracted to Rendili to prevent breach of contract on other deals.