StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Saxton's multi-tiered classifications of Star and non-Star warships, which is basically observed in numerous sources

Hmm, I've been wondering about that. How does he tell the difference between, say, a frigate and a Star Frigate? I've had some trouble with understanding this, myself.

he also tried to argue that the IH is dagger-shaped.

It is dagger-shaped.

If you squint your eyes and paint a black triangle over it in bird's-eye view, not paying attention to any edges. :P

However, to people who have no trouble seeing, it's cylinder-shaped.

VT-16 wrote:Hmm, I've been wondering about that. How does he tell the difference between, say, a frigate and a Star Frigate? I've had some trouble with understanding this, myself.

Star frigates are ships one step below Star Destroyers on the larger scale of warships that Saxton uses on SWTC, and made canon in the books that he wrote and served as a consultant on. The smallest known canon Star Destroyer is the 850 meter Bakura-class, and the only ship that is canonically labeled as "star frigate" is the 825 meter Munificent-class.

Ordinary frigates are just whatever WEG called frigates in their "standard" warship scale, such as Nebulon-Bs and Corona-class ships. They seem to hover around 300 meters long, and we know that light cruisers (one step above frigate) like the Carrack are 350 meters long.

There seems to be an overlap between what the "standard" warship scale calls a "heavy cruiser," and what would qualify as a star frigate. The modernized Dreadnaught-class heavy cruisers (Assault Frigates), and (probable) Acclamator-derived "Class II Frigates" are unconfirmed star frigates, but lend support to this idea because they carry the frigate name and fall into the same size range.

Again, thank you Publius.

The problem is, without any specifically stated system, identifying something as "Star Frigate" won't do, because people like McEwok (oh let's face it, it's really just McEwok), will jump on it and whine to the admins or something.

Then there's the problems with the recently released EAW, where even the Victory-class is identified as a "heavy frigate". (Though that may be explained as a downgrade from SD to SF). And not to mention the Mon Cal Star Cruisers often being smaller than Imperial Star Destroyers. (Though with modern destroyers being little more than small cruisers, this might just be a case of semantics).

MC cruisers in all liklihood use a Mon Cal classification system in which ships like the Home One and Mediator are classified as battlecruisers, yet are the size of Imperial Star Cruisers. Also, MC cruisers are about the same size or larger than SDs volumetrically. Plus, reactor ability and role influence a ship's designation.

Then there's the whole thing about modern-day destroyers being little more than "small cruisers", so it's possible that the Empire kept a more obsolete naming-scheme, while a relatively new military organization like the Mon Cals (who reportedly studied the Imperial military during their liberation struggle) kept their designations more "up-to-date".

I doubt that makes any sense. Technological stasis has been solidified with only fads or preferences and cyclical trends prevailing anymore. After twenty-five millienia, the technology and military combat should've been locked down.

I'm just thinking about a possible semantics issue, with one faction choosing to use 'Destroyer', whereas another would use 'Cruiser' instead, even though they are both basically cruisers anyway.

Probably because the Empire's destroyers are asked to do more destroyer things than the Mon Calamari's cruisers.

Ah yes, that's true.

I reckon, with the need for stealth in the Rebel fleet, their cruisers would have to be more independent and go on longer individual journeys than any Imperial vessel.

The damned Admins over there have now ganged up on me, still demanding I prove my point, when all they have to do is read the arguments I made above. These twittering fools are getting a bit annoying. Now they basically waiting for me to do what they call "vandalism" (even though what I have done does not constitute vandalism) so they can get rid of me.

Didn't you state all the sources Publius provided? =(

Indeed I did. Note that this is for Pellaeon's retreat at Endor being "questionable" (the softest word I could think of without being dishonest), not about the whole Commander issue, I reverted that without a hitch (until McEwok discovers the change that is). The annoying part is that after I've addressed all of their grievances they still claim I have to prove my point, and even bring up points that I have already addressed, showing that they completely ignored my whole argument. THis is from the Admins over there!!

Thanks for the help VT. Hopefully "controversial" will be Pellaeon-friendly enough for that crowd.

Ever since I got a reply from an admin about people like McEwok "being good for keeping our work in check" (or something) I've lost all faith in their capability to deal with troublemakers.

He seems to show up on their net meetings as well (events I am almost completely oblivious to and have little interest in) so I wouldn't be surprised if he slowly cons his way into some cozy position within the hierarcy.

Not paying attention to rules about canon (with newer information trumping older in a conflict, and sources surrounding the movies ranking higher than RPGs etc.) and constantly whoring out one source (WEG) at the negligence of others, just makes him a persona non grata as far as I'm concerned.

VT-16 wrote:Ever since I got a reply from an admin about people like McEwok "being good for keeping our work in check" (or something) I've lost all faith in their capability to deal with troublemakers.

He seems to show up on their net meetings as well (events I am almost completely oblivious to and have little interest in) so I wouldn't be surprised if he slowly cons his way into some cozy position within the hierarcy.

Not paying attention to rules about canon (with newer information trumping older in a conflict, and sources surrounding the movies ranking higher than RPGs etc.) and constantly whoring out one source (WEG) at the negligence of others, just makes him a persona non grata as far as I'm concerned.

Isn't he actually part of the staff now? I seem to recall an announcement on the subject there a while back.

What.

VT-16 wrote:What.

I can find the news article, but his title says it all:

TFN EU Staff

Thankfully TFN is not an actual part of the SW Wiki. And what the hell is "TFN EU Staff"? A fancier way of saying you're a fanfic writer?

I believe he conned his way into becoming a Mod at TFN.

Wow. Kuralyov has actually said that "violating the chain of command in star wars is anything but controversial" and cited incidences where it has gone unpunished. I have to admit, I didn't expect them to go this far to defend 'ole Admiral P.

The Original Nex wrote:Wow. Kuralyov has actually said that "violating the chain of command in star wars is anything but controversial" and cited incidences where it has gone unpunished. I have to admit, I didn't expect them to go this far to defend 'ole Admiral P.

Personally, I feel that Pellaeon's actions were justifiable and perhaps even tactically sound, but to go so far as to say they weren't illegal is simply stupid. Has Kuralyov attempted to back up his assertion?

Personally, I feel that Pellaeon's actions were justifiable and perhaps even tactically sound, but to go so far as to say they weren't illegal is simply stupid.

Exactly. You can have that opinion and still understand that, well intentioned or not, the retrat call was illegal.

Has Kuralyov attempted to back up his assertion?

He just listed a bunch of examples where the chain of command was broken and nothing was done about it, and then goes on to say: "violating the chain of command in star wars is anything but controversial"

What's with Nebulax? He doesn't contribute to the discussion, and only serves as a yes-man to the Admins.

EDIT: I figure it would help if I supplied a link to page I've bein whining about:

+http://starwars.wikicities.com/wiki/Tal ... oric.3F.22

Here's the thread where McEwok's new status as a member of the staff was announced:

+http://boards.theforce.net/literature/b ... 3045369/p1

I saw this weeks ago, but I didn't read through it because I couldn't put up with the disgusting display of ass kissing there. McEwok is quite loved and respected over at TF.N. One of the few people who actually had something negative to say, FTeik, was modded for "baiting" (If you're reading this Fteik, I'd like to know what you wrote that was supposed to be so bad). However, comments like this one

Excellence wrote:Poor McEwok. Hunted by the traditionalist fleeties ever seeking a more, uh, closer insight.

were perfectly acceptable.

Also, McEwok's not Arkady Hodge anymore, but some guy named Paul:

Thrawn McEwok wrote:A few years ago, the McEwok identity was co-opted by a postmodernist "hive-mind" project shared among a group of fanboys, inspired in part by Luther Blisset. After a while, as all Dadaist things do, this naturally imploded in an amusing mess, and one of the results was that the McEwok who walked away wasn't the McEwok who'd walked in.

Fortunately, McEwok's not a mod (yet). It looks like he's just going to be writing reviews and articles for the main site. Still, he's now in a respected position, so debating him there and calling him on his bullshit is going to be harder than it ever was before. In the past, I've been swarmed by TF.net babies for insulting McEwok with such horrible words as "liar," and debates have been locked because of that. Imagine how bad things are going to be now.