Mil Spec Centurion

Sphynx

Sphynx

Commodore
While I realize this is a controversial subject, I'd still like to ask the question. Does anyone know where I can purchase a Mil Spec Centurion? I've aquired over 300,000 credits, and I've been looking for one but can't find it. I thought Perry would be the best option, but no luck there. Any hints?
 
You may want to try New Constantinople or New Detroit. I was suprised when I found out that Perry didn't have ships, but then again, it is a military base not a used car lot! ;>

You might want to look into getting a stock ver. From what I've read, that stock might give you better options than milspec.

Have Fun,

Starblazer
 
A fully equipped stock Centurion costs about 400.000 - 500.000 so, it's your choice which way to go. I chose stock because I want to be able to change my configurations at will.

Fully equipped means four guns, lvl 3 reactor/shields, missiles, decent radar (hunter 6i), tungsten all, turret etc.
 
It's the branch of the military you serve with in the 'mainline' games -- the Terran Confederation Space Force. (As opposed to the Terran Confederation Space Navy, Terran Confederation Marine Corps, Terran Confederation Army, etc.)

To be "milspec", a ship would be designed to specifications provided by the Space Forces.
 
Understood.

So this is another one of your cute jabs at the Remake. Also understood. It's getting kind of old.

The developers have already said that there will probably be no milspec ships in the next release. Until then, people will continue to answer questions about them.
 
I'm not attacking the remake, I'm just pointing out things about Wing Commander continuity. That's pretty much what I do.

The "oh so offended" act is getting old, though.
 
I think that while buying a prepackaged ship because it's cheaper is nice, it kinda defeats the point of Privateer -- getting your ship to run just the way you want it is part of the fun (I'm definitely not a "all boosted up and all tachyons" kind of kitty). I'd rather do without milspecs. This said, in WCU you'll get to buy military fighters after doing missions for the relevant factions, and they will be less customizable than the civilian stuff, although they'll start off with builtin upgrades. This to me makes sense because a military would insist on standardization and it's a fact that militaries use their own crazy spare parts in the real world a lot of the time.
 
jkeefe....don't be a jackass. TRUE fans don't appreciate fan boy syndrome. its what has made every remake in the history of remakes suck massive amounts of ass. and for you or anyone else to expect fans of the original NOT to get pissed off at the fact that some people elected to 'do it our way' over the right way? well...that's stupidity.
 
I'll gladly admit to being guilty of fangirlism when adding six turrets to a Drayman ^^; I need to scale that down... three seems reasonable though, after all the Galaxy has two.

ahem, sorry for teh sp@mming.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
It's the branch of the military you serve with in the 'mainline' games -- the Terran Confederation Space Force. (As opposed to the Terran Confederation Space Navy, Terran Confederation Marine Corps, Terran Confederation Army, etc.)

To be "milspec", a ship would be designed to specifications provided by the Space Forces.
Click to expand...

Actually, 'mil spec' is a bit more flexible a term than that. Suppose the military commisions a ship design, or adaptation, but in the end does not buy it, although the ship prototype passed their testing. The company making the ship has good reasons to call that model 'mil spec', even if not *sold* to the military. HumVee's for example.
Also, there are audio amplifiers advertised as 'mil spec' on the basis (which I consider shady, though) that *some* of the components used are mil spec, e.g.: resistors, potentiometers. In fact, "mil spec" is far less rigorous a claim than to say "UL-approved", as there is such thing as UL approval, which you either get, or don't; and which you'd better have if you claim to.

EDIT:
What would be more interesting than to use the term "mil spec" for denoting a ship that has already been furnished with equipment, would be if a mil spec ship was generally more reliable and stronger than a non-mil-spec ship, all other things being equal.
 
Okay, I can see that this is spiraling downward rather quickly. I understand the difference of opinions, and that's fine. In my mind, "milspec" was simply signifying that it already comes very well equipped. I guess I didn't realize that when you buy a "milspec" (for the purposes of the current make of the game) ship, you can't modify it as well. That being understood, I will probably just get a stock ship and go from there.

However, I do have a suggestion. My question has been asked and answered, and the opposing sides on this issue are sniping at each other again. We all know how both sides feel, many of you know where I stand on this, and this conversation is probably not going to be productive. I think dan_w has proposed a possible middle ground that could merit some exploration (maybe calling it something other than milspec that would be a little more "canon friendly"), but if that is not a suggestion that both sides are willing to discuss calmly, this conversation may need to be shelved for the time being. It may be time to lock this thread.
 
The following is said nicely, calmly, and without the intent to argue. Please read it as such.

BradMick said:
for you or anyone else to expect fans of the original NOT to get pissed off at the fact that some people elected to 'do it our way' over the right way? well...that's stupidity.
Click to expand...
What is your definition of "fan"? I am a fan of the original; I owned the original Privateer, I liked it, I played it a lot, etc. To me that means I was (and still am) a fan.

Clearly we have differing opinions, and there is nothing wrong with that, but we are both fans.
 
When people have no good reasons to argue for or against a particular policy, and they know it, they turn to "demonization". Typical of "demonization" is pushing a new term, which is supposed to be bad.
Witness it here: "fan boy", as in
jkeefe....don't be a jackass. TRUE fans don't appreciate fan boy syndrome.
Click to expand...
No one can appreciate "fan boy syndrome", since no such thing has ever existed, nor will ever exist, since the term will never be coined, for lack of useful meaning. Fortunately, there are some actual arguments, sometimes put forward, such as,
its what has made every remake in the history of remakes suck massive amounts of ass. and for you or anyone else to expect fans of the original NOT to get pissed off at the fact that some people elected to 'do it our way' over the right way? well...that's stupidity.
Click to expand...
Somewhat of a point. Remakes are not an every day occurrence, though, and are often made by greedy corporations trying to make a quick and easy buck. But what I think is stupidity is to insist that "nothing can be different", or "Just Say NO", as a rule of thumb that opposes all change, whether positive, negative or neutral, as evil. Reminds me of the Church of Man people. Then the distinction betwee "remake" and "fanboy patches?", like WCU? I don't see where it says, in what dictionary or encyclopedia, that "remake" has to mean "exact copy"? Must the number of systems remain what it was? Is there no consideration of the fact that the number of systems in the the original had to be limited in order to put a cap on the number of floppies needed in distribution, and NOT because the number of systems was somehow "sacred"?
And as a fan of Privateer, I consider it the best game, for many reasons. But I'm not blind to the shortcomings of the original, either. Like the argument about whether to put more turrets on a drayman. Boy, like it makes any sense having big slow turkeys floating around, with a single turret for defense, in spite of having up to number 8 reactor and plenty of skin on which to fit such turrets, but, just say NO, just because some "true fan" says so. Argument is evil. Thou dost not question the almighty words of a "true fan", right?
Bunch of Retros...
 
Yes, questioning the fandom of others does seem a little out of line. Some people are completely satisfied with the Remake as is, and they can honestly be called fans, because they enjoyed the original. Some people dislike the differences in the Remake, and they can honestly be called fans because they enjoyed the original. People who have never played the original and only the Remake could still honestly be called fans of the Original, because they enjoy the Remake that was somewhat loosely based upon it.

We all enjoyed the Original, so I think we can leave the question of fandom aside, since it is really a moot point and will only lead to flaming. So, let's try to leave words like "fanboy" and "retro" aside here if this conversation is going to continue.

I myself rather like the exta features (maybe it's because I'm a VegaStrike fan), and I appreciate the fact that if I don't want to use them, I don't have to and the game will play very close to the original. In that way, I see the current make as capable of giving a "win-win" situation. For some members here that is not good enough. But, Mamaya Otaru has already offered to make a "by the book" version of the Remake, as well. Both parties will get what they want. There is no need for this to get nasty and personal.
 
Exactly. I must have enjoyed the original, since I played the game from beginning to end about ten times. And I felt Privateer 2 was murder of the original concept, by contrast. I was very disappointed, and it took me years to understand why I disliked Priv2 so much, and why I liked Priv1 so much better. It forced me to do a lot of thinking.

And yet I don't say the original was "perfect", nor do I really care that much for "cannon" per se, so much as a signpost to be used as reference in discussions; --as opposed to using it as catechism.

EDIT:
In fact, I'm glad about some of the differences in the remake versus the original, and there are some differences I don't like. And there are things I like in WCU versus the original and the remake. But my point is that there is no substitute to discussing new proposals, one at a time, on their merits. I know perfectly well that seemingly inoccuous changes can affect game balancing issues. I'm even more aware of the importance of art content: The immersive feeling of the original required continuity and matching at an aesthetic level that is not easy to define, and therefore not easy to defend against contributed art that might negatively affect it. And some of us know how MOO2 got butchered with MOO3, which replaced much of the beautiful art of the original, with management screens that look like online tax forms. But to say "just say NO" is as lame as the political campaign by that name, in the real world. Someone posted a couple of ideas how to smooth the transition to RF. Last time I checked, there wasn't a single reply. And I'm sure it's all the Retro pressure preventing some people from saying "that sounds (or doesn't) like a good idea". Either way they'd be tacitly acknowledging the possibility of introducing a small change to the story. Eden forbid! Avoid that thread!
EDIT2: I checked again, and now there are 7 replies, so scratch out the last couple of sentences. Actually don't. I'd better read those posts first... ;-)
 
Is there no consideration of the fact that the number of systems in the the original had to be limited in order to put a cap on the number of floppies needed in distribution, and NOT because the number of systems was somehow "sacred"?
Click to expand...

While I agree with much of what you say, you are touching in a very big complaint I have about many fan projects: the assumption that their changes are somehow justified because the original game was "limited".

Unless you can absolutely prove that there was some desire to have more than 70 star systems in Privateer, to claim that they were removed for technical reasons is a poor excuse. How much memory does it take to define a system in Privateer? You could easily quadruple the number of systems in the original Privateer without running out of disk space -- most planets/bases/etc. use the same graphics set.

We can't even prove that the scenes cut from Wing Commander III weren't done for a proper balancing reason - we certainly can't prove that X ship which doesn't appear or X system which isn't there were removed or intended or anything of the sort.

As I said, however, I agree with most of what you said about fans. Preferring one thing over another doesn't make you a true fan or any less of a fan. We're all Wing Commander fans (or Slashdot weirdos). In terms of the remake, it is being held to a standard because that is what it originally promised - we had Hellcat on IRC the other day complaining that people should play the 'true original' Privateer before trying Spirit's WCU patch...

Complaining about the remake (which, incidentally, is not remotely what I was doing here - JKeefe was overreacting to an ordinary Wing Commander continuity note) is not to claim that it should not exist or that it is bad. There's this cult of anti-CIC-people people (hi, PeteyG - I don't know who you are or why you hate me) who likes to rant and rage whenever I think anything... but I absolutely do not hate the Privateer Remake. Absolutely, no matter what anyone will tell you I think. I deal with it the way I do because that's the best way to get my point across in a sea of people who could care less either way.

I make grandstanding points because it gets effects... I point out continuity points wherever possible because I think it helps people become more familiar with Wing Commander... but there is no *hate* there, there's no dislike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top