Originally posted by Quarto
I like how you completely ignore what he says and fall back to simply restating the position he's arguing against. And by the way, the Banshee and the Thunderbolt are both heavy fighters. I know this, because the manual says so.
The Banshee from Armada is a heavy fighter, the one from WC4 is a light fighter. If you are confused, I suggest that you check the
Ships Database. There's no argument here, at all. If you don't like how ships are classified in WC, too bad, direct your complains to the Border Worlds Militia, or to the people who made WC4.
Everyone may say a specific ship "fells" more like a different classification, but what's the point in that? One could very well argue the Crossbow is a heavy fighter and not a bomber. Anyone can argue reasonably that the WC1 Rapier is a light, a medium or even a heavy fighter. It has little armor, but very good guns and the best shields in the fleet. But confed made a decision when they classified it and I think it’s better to keep using it. Nothing we can discuss here will change the factual reality of how the game classifies the ships.
On a side note, I didn't ignore the message but in fact responded it adequately. Since, apparently, you didn't understand, I will explain it in more detail to you. I said that the differences that he pointed are irrelevant
because medium fighters don't have to be all alike. Let's illustrate that affirmation with an example: If medium fighters had to be identical, they couldn’t be any different from a scimitar. It's utterly silly and useless to nitpick about statistics. I could point out that the Vindicator is only 20 meters long, against 27 of the hellcat and 34 of the thunderbolt, what means it's exactly the same size of an arrow, a light fighter. But the only thing that matters, really, is how the ships were classified by the people who made them.
.
