Anyone not like the books?

[Bandit LOAF]

No, they really can't. Good thing that quote from Privateer doesn't even come close to clearly proving your claim

I guess you're right. A direct quote from one of the games stating that Confed is losing hundreds of ships a day doesn't in any way prove that Confed has hundreds of ships a day to lose. And you proved your point without citing a single fact! Amazing!

So, you've never not decided to see a movie because it got bad reviews? Same thing.

Sure, I've decided whether or not to see a movie based on a professional review. But that's not really your claim - which is that you decided you didn't like a book because you heard there was some sort of continuity error.

Even if you assume that about 1/3 of the carriers' complement was bombers/heavy fighters, and twice as many Confed fighters were lost as pilots were lost, that's still trading 100 bombers for 30 Confed pilots. Not even counting their fighter cover. Not that it couldn't be done but definitely unlikely.

That seems reasonable - attacking a hardened installation like Olympus is equivalent to the heavy loss strikes on carriers discussed in the novels and other background fiction. (And again, you're assuming - we've never seen a carrier with that high a percent of heavy fighters/bombers before...).

Just going off your game guides here, even if you're counting the first two Fralthra as part of the 5, the Fralthra in Ghorah Khar 2E would be #4 or #5. If you lost 2D, that means you didn't kill a Fralthra in 2D.

I alt-tab'd through it this morning - you can kill five Fralthra in the regular series and then go on to the losing mission to kill a sixth (eject after you blow up the two Fralthra in mission D).

Not sure what you mean by CAP, but escort ships wouldn't prevent the scenario where each cruiser faces 20 bombers and the carrier 60 bombers.

CAP stands for Combat Air Patrol. It's one of the primary missions of the majority of a carrier's fighter wing - to create an umbrella of recon/interceptor ships around the center of a carrier or fleet. Most of the missions you fly in Wing Commander are CAP - flying from point to point to intercept enemy forces before they can locate or threaten your carrier. In a 'real' Wing Commander battle, a carrier and her escort ships will be protected from *other* line warships by her CAP fighters.

 

[sea_monkey]

I guess you're right. A direct quote from one of the games stating that Confed is losing hundreds of ships a day doesn't in any way prove that Confed has hundreds of ships a day to lose. And you proved your point without citing a single fact! Amazing!

It's but one quote in a spinoff game. Not nearly as conclusive as you'd like to make it seem. Like I said, if there are a hundreds of fighters just laying around at every colony, how come only two scramble at Gwynedd? Where are they at Olympus, Blackmane, Pembroke? Why only a few hundred at Earth? Just doesn't make sense.

Sure, I've decided whether or not to see a movie based on a professional review. But that's not really your claim - which is that you decided you didn't like a book because you heard there was some sort of continuity error.

Careful now, you're going back to the bit where you tell me (incorrectly) what I said again. I didn't even say I'd never read the book, just that I suspected I wouldn't like it from the reviews I read.

That seems reasonable - attacking a hardened installation like Olympus is equivalent to the heavy loss strikes on carriers discussed in the novels and other background fiction. (And again, you're assuming - we've never seen a carrier with that high a percent of heavy fighters/bombers before...).

I think I'm actually being pretty generous with the assumption. I said 100 bombers or heavy fighters (Gothri). Seems pretty reasonable, especially for carriers equipped for taking out a space station.

I have to disagree that trading 30 Confed planes for at least 100 Kilrathi heavies/bombers + an unknown amount of fighter cover + the cruisers, destroyers and corvettes from 3 carrier groups, is reasonable. Maybe if you're assuming the kill ratios are skewed ... but you don't agree with that.

You're told earlier on that the Concordia is heading for Ghorah Khar but can't arrive in time for the battle - which is why Bear and company are a surprise. Bear explains that "The Admiral sent us ahead, after we lost communications with Olympus.".

Right, so the Concordia is there. Remember, I was arguing that, if there's five Kilrathi carriers in the system, why don't they finish the vastly outnumbered Concordia and the depleted Olympus Station.

I alt-tab'd through it this morning - you can kill five Fralthra in the regular series and then go on to the losing mission to kill a sixth (eject after you blow up the two Fralthra in mission D).

That's a glitch in the game. I know if you destroy the Sivar in WC1, but eject right next to the Tiger's Claw, you go to the losing ending as well. I bet if you eject right after you destroy K'Thithrak Mang, you'll get the losing ending there too. It's not meant to be like that. Ghorah Khar 2E is only meant to be played if you didn't destroy a Fralthra.

CAP stands for Combat Air Patrol. It's one of the primary missions of the majority of a carrier's fighter wing - to create an umbrella of recon/interceptor ships around the center of a carrier or fleet. Most of the missions you fly in Wing Commander are CAP - flying from point to point to intercept enemy forces before they can locate or threaten your carrier. In a 'real' Wing Commander battle, a carrier and her escort ships will be protected from *other* line warships by her CAP fighters.

Ok, I have been taking into account the fighters from the beginning though. The question is, what difference do the escort ships make in that scenario? Not much.

I didn't even bring Forstchen into it until the very end. If you just had the games to go from, you could draw the same conclusions. Action Stations phase shields just happen to fit into the game cycle of shield/weapon strength. You don't go out of your way to make the explanation, it fits without any novels at all.
So all the ads and articles I see written about "the latest" in RAM advancements/MP3 capacity/fighter/WLAN/printing or scanning definition technology means it is the very first RAM chip/MP3 player/fighter jet/wireless system/printer/scanner ever? That dog don't hunt.

I'm not saying it's not a valid explanation. It's fine. It's just a bit of a stretch. If Action Stations had never been written, it probably wouldn't have even occurred to most people that phase shields were around in 2634.

 

[Frosty]

You are crazy, and also stupid...

I shouldn't say "not like" because I thought they were enjoyable works of fiction, but I don't consider End Run, Fleet Action, Heart of the Tiger or the other books to be "the official word" on what happened in the WC universe. Some of the things I didn't like:

It's pretty clear to me that you lost any hint of sanity when you said that. How can you not consider them to be the official word when they are the official word, printed, bound and published specifically to be so? You're stupid.

Everything you say after that is entirely undeserving of rebuttal, but I'm going to argue with you anyway, because it provides an effective platform from which to hurl insults.

Relax bro, we're on the same side. *Flashed NWA (Nerds With Attitudes) gang symbol*

I don't think psych will have any problem with me saying to you that A: he is not your "bro," and B: you are not on the same side. I'm not even going to get into how much I hate that creepy *flash gang symbol* crap, except to call you a little faggot. Shut up you little faggot.

I'm not saying this is impossible but it just fits the games to me better if the Kilrathi use carriers more as mobile headquarters while the cruisers do the dirty work on the front lines. IMHO.

It just fits you better? Fuck you.

And stop saying "IMHO" IMHO IMHO IMHO IMHO IMHO IMHO BLAH BLAH BLAH shut the fuck up. This isn't 1996 anymore; everyone has outgrown the need to use retarded acronyms like "IMHO," especially when you're not even talking in real-time. And your opinion is anything but humble, you arrogant motherfucker. If you were any humble at all, you wouldn't assume that you could ignore the novels and be taken seriously.

I'm not saying they're not important, I'm saying they're not AS important. In WW2 the number of carriers in any battle was critical. This was because the only way of bringing aircraft to the battle was building a giant floating metal runway in the middle of the ocean. In space that's not necessary because there's no gravity, you don't need to running start to get up into the air. So destroyers and cruisers can carry a small amount of ships too, unlike in WW2.

I'm going to assume that when you said "aircraft" you actually meant "strike craft," since carriers were not the only way to bring just aircraft in general, and as far as Wing Commander is concerned, carriers still are the only way to bring strike craft to a battle. That's just how it is, nobody cares if it makes sense to you.

If you guys liked the books, that's fine. Wing Commander has major continuity issues throughout the entire series so I figure everyone has to pick and choose what they like to some extent. I was just wondering if anyone else saw the same issues that I did.

This isn't an issue of "liking" the books. The books are the truth, and there is no way around that. The whole point of canon is that you do not have to, and are not supposed to pick and choose, you dumb fuck.

I would rather pick and choose elements of all the materials that make the most consistent and enjoyable universe...

How does consistency = enjoyability? How is the Wing Commander back story any more contradictory than real accounts of actual human history? How much crack did your mother smoke before you were born?

I read it, I just didn't find it convincing.

It is convincing because it exists. They only have to say "This is how things are" and it is true. No need to convince anyone, because it's simply accepted. Go write your own fucking fiction, cocksucker. What's the point of trying to be a fan of Wing Commander if you just want to edit it? If you don't like it, douchebag, if you think it's inconsistent, go fucking make your own, and it'll be as consistent as you want. And then someday some little prick on a message board can say that, in his humble opinion, it just doesn't fit him, etc...

I just got the picture when I read Fleet Action that they were real concerned about how many carriers they had where as I saw it, it wouldn't really make a difference.

You saw it wrong. If they're concerned, it makes a difference. Carriers are the only way to physically transport large numbers of heavy, capship- and base-killing strike craft to a battle and deploy them. Lose them, you lose the bulk of your offensive capability.

So ... what you're saying is that the presence of destroyers and cruisers which can carry fighters, diminishes but not eliminates the importance of carriers in WC?

Nope, that's not what he's saying. Leave it to a total dipshit like you to completely misunderstand as straightforward a set of statements as he made.

People like you show up all the time. They think they like Wing Commander, but they have a burning desire to re-write it to fit their preconceived notions of what "makes sense." It's a fictional work, dick-licker; the writers' word is the word of God. Get over it or go away.

 

[jedi2187]

Leave it to a total dipshit like you to completely misunderstand as straightforward a set of statements as he made.
People like you show up all the time. They think they like Wing Commander, but they have a burning desire to re-write it to fit their preconceived notions of what "makes sense." It's a fictional work, dick-licker; the writers' word is the word of God. Get over it or go away.

Very classy. And you wonder why no one posts on the forums anymore. Want some more cheese with you whine?

 

[Frosty]

Look at me, I'm double-posting like that faggot sea_monkey!

It's but one quote in a spinoff game.

The franchise is a spinoff, but it's the exact same fucking universe.

Not nearly as conclusive as you'd like to make it seem.

Absolutely as conclusive as he'd like to make it seem. It is a factual statement made in a game which takes place within the Wing Commander universe. It is law.

Careful now, you're going back to the bit where you tell me (incorrectly) what I said again.

Careful now, pompous jerks eventually get a boot shoved up their cavernous ass.

I think I'm actually being pretty generous with the assumption.

A bit too generous.

That's a glitch in the game...It's not meant to be like that.

So simply because you can glitch into the losing ending from inappropriate points, it's completely worthless no matter what? I guess little elves put it there without the programmers knowing it, right?

Ok, I have been taking into account the fighters from the beginning though. The question is, what difference do the escort ships make in that scenario? Not much.

And you know this how? Oh, that's right! You don't know it. Sit down.

I'm not saying it's not a valid explanation. It's fine. It's just a bit of a stretch.

It's either valid and fine or it's a stretch, you can't have it both ways, you spineless little shit. Do you agree or disagree?

If Action Stations had never been written, it probably wouldn't have even occurred to most people that phase shields were around in 2634.

And that means absolutely nothing at all.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

It's but one quote in a spinoff game. Not nearly as conclusive as you'd like to make it seem. Like I said, if there are a hundreds of fighters just laying around at every colony, how come only two scramble at Gwynedd? Where are they at Olympus, Blackmane, Pembroke? Why only a few hundred at Earth? Just doesn't make sense.

Ah, yes, of course, Privateers status as a 'spinoff game' certainly puts its reliablity well below the ravings of some guy at a message board.

(It's also hard to believe that you're asking why only two fighters scramble at Caernarvon (Gwynedd is the system)... given that the entire process is seen in the game (Blair recieves SOS while working in the comm room and personally assigns himself and Shadow to save the Concordia) and then later explicitly explained in the dialogue ("I knew I was the best pilot to help"). We've also already discussed that lots of fighters *do* appear at both Olympus and Blackmane... go back several posts.)

Careful now, you're going back to the bit where you tell me (incorrectly) what I said again. I didn't even say I'd never read the book, just that I suspected I wouldn't like it from the reviews I read.

I don't think you said anything about reviews. You said you wouldn't like it because of some sort of percieved geeky tech complaint.

I think I'm actually being pretty generous with the assumption. I said 100 bombers or heavy fighters (Gothri). Seems pretty reasonable, especially for carriers equipped for taking out a space station.

I have to disagree that trading 30 Confed planes for at least 100 Kilrathi heavies/bombers + an unknown amount of fighter cover + the cruisers, destroyers and corvettes from 3 carrier groups, is reasonable. Maybe if you're assuming the kill ratios are skewed ... but you don't agree with that.

Well, False Colors gives a fairly detailed breakdown of a Kilrathi heavy carrier's air wing (circa WC3)... with 16 out of 128 fighters capable of carrying torpedoes. Now, that was a heavy carrier with a double-strength wing... but we'll ignore that and put two squadrons of strike craft on each of the three SO2 carriers anyway. That's a total of 48 bombers, not 100. (In fact, this fits rather well with the rest of the series... since Blair+Wingmen engage a grand total of 30 bombers in the two Ghorah Khar missions... roughly the number that would be included in the final two carrier wings.)

(Add to this the fact that thirty was a number you made up specifically to look lower than the amount of Kilrathi fighters that needed to be destroyed/disabled... and the fact that the later attack from the remaining carrier groups involves no destroyers or corvettes...)

Right, so the Concordia is there. Remember, I was arguing that, if there's five Kilrathi carriers in the system, why don't they finish the vastly outnumbered Concordia and the depleted Olympus Station.

You're seriously asking why the carriers that have already expended their strike forces and their heavy escort ships attacking Olympus don't continue to launch attacks *and* engage the newly arrived Confederation dreadnaught? And you understand that the entire point of the Kilrathi attack on Olympus was to draw the 14th Fleet away from Deneb and not actually to take Ghorah Khar? The surviving Kilrathi forces have completed their mission *and* lack the offensive forces to press the attack. Carriers are not magic battleships or even line warships at all - they are as strong as their air wings... they don't waddle into battle and fire broadsides at enemy fleets.

That's a glitch in the game. I know if you destroy the Sivar in WC1, but eject right next to the Tiger's Claw, you go to the losing ending as well. I bet if you eject right after you destroy K'Thithrak Mang, you'll get the losing ending there too. It's not meant to be like that. Ghorah Khar 2E is only meant to be played if you didn't destroy a Fralthra.

If you eject after you destroy K'Tithrak Mang you get the 'pilot captured' screen. When the game wants to force you to land, it doesn't allow you to keep playing the game.

Ok, I have been taking into account the fighters from the beginning though. The question is, what difference do the escort ships make in that scenario? Not much.

Line warships engage other line warships, even in the context of a carrier battlegroup. My destroyer will attack your destroyer, your cruiser will attack my cruiser and so forth. We see it throughout the games - escort a Gilgamesh to blow up a Ralatha, escort the Coventry to blow up a Fralthi II and so forth. There's also plenty of other mundane uses for escort ships. Picket duty, for instance. Your destroyer screen 10,000-100,000 km from the nucleus of your carrier extends your RADAR/LIDAR/whatever-they-use-in-space range by a hugely valuable amount. They're for scouting, too - when your carrier is on the move your escort ships move ahead of it... this is especially important in the context of Wing Commander, with data-null jump points connecting star systems. You don't stick your carrier through the hole sight unseen - you work your way up through fighters, corvettes, destroyers, etc. Planetary bombardment is another big one - escort ships clear landing zones for marines and provide space-based ground support with their large calibur guns. They're also cannon fodder - in most situations you have to eliminate the escort ships before you can move in on the carrier... look at Secret Missions 1, the entire game was about eliminating the Kilrathi destroyers and cruisers before the Sivar could be attacked.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Very classy. And you wonder why no one posts on the forums anymore. Want some more cheese with you whine?

I'm pretty sure that both:

a. People still post to the forums. Bandwith is higher than it's ever been.

and

b. Frosty hasn't ever wondered that.

 

[jedi2187]

I'm pretty sure that both:

a. People still post to the forums. Bandwith is higher than it's ever been.

and

b. Frosty hasn't ever wondered that.

Hmm.. wouldn't dispute you on A, but for B.... well, Frosty needs to chill out. He may be a Brig. General, but he sure is acting like a Private Dick. Especially after that nasty private message he sent, if you'd like me to quote it here, I'd be happy to.

I came to this forum as a WC fan, albeit on the Mac side. Never cared much for the novels, especially WC IV. I liked the description of the engagements between Maverick & Co. vs. Tolwyn and his cronies. But the portrayal of Blair torqued me. I mean, c'mon! Both your former commanding officer and the one guy who fought alongside you on a truckload of skirmishes and battles bail out for the Border worlds, and you stay the loyal Confed lapdog? Oy! That is soooo Skywalker.

Anyway, my beef with Frosty. If you disagree with someone, state your case, don't stoop to namecalling, and leave it at that. It isn't the first time I've seen regular posters here belittle newbies, but this was too harsh. No doubt I'll be banned after this, not that it's going to hurt my ego or anything (unlike Frosty's pride, whose mannerism is as attractive as feces stuck to Melek's furry arse-crack).

My two cents.

Jedi2187 signing off for good and heading to Pilot Country.
*flashes NWA (Nerds With Attitudes) gang symbol*

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Frosty isn't a mod, he can't ban you.

On the other hand, if you have an issue with a poster you really should take it up with someone who is a mod in private rather than interrupting a debate to let the world know...

 

[Shipgate]

This thread is truly amazing.

Though I've nothing at all to contribute. I remember starting to read the book in junior high and then I lost it at school somewhere. And all I remember about it is Blair and Hobbes losing their mission and Maniac rubbing it in. And I was like, "Fresh!"

We should all take a break and get some fresh air today.

 

[sea_monkey]

Everything you say after that is entirely undeserving of rebuttal, but I'm going to argue with you anyway, because it provides an effective platform from which to hurl insults.

LOL at getting mad at some guy over the internet. You're funny man.

I'm going to assume that when you said "aircraft" you actually meant "strike craft," since carriers were not the only way to bring just aircraft in general, and as far as Wing Commander is concerned, carriers still are the only way to bring strike craft to a battle. That's just how it is, nobody cares if it makes sense to you.

Cruisers and destroyers in WC can carry fighters and bombers, large numbers in fact. They COULD NOT in WWII. That is why carriers aren't *as* important in WC -- the degree to which is debateable, the fact that they aren't really isn't.

This isn't an issue of "liking" the books. The books are the truthQUOTE]

No they aren't you silly Billy. It's a piece of fiction. It's not real. It didn't happen anywhere, except in your imagination.

You saw it wrong. If they're concerned, it makes a difference. Carriers are the only way to physically transport large numbers of heavy, capship- and base-killing strike craft to a battle and deploy them. Lose them, you lose the bulk of your offensive capability.

Well besides cruisers that is. And like I said before, once the carriers are AT the battle of this magnitude, they've done their job. They're a secondary target ... the primary target being the capship and base killing strike craft, plus the Earth killing cruisers and destroyers armed with nukes. And since we were talking about the Battle of Earth in that bit, the number of carriers is largely irrelevant for Confed since the fighters can rally from other bases in the solar system. A carrier can serve as an effective base but its not like the number of them is going to be a critical determining point in the battle.

(Aside: If Loaf is correct and there ARE hundreds of fighters at every colony, carriers would have been useful for shuffling fighters from other nearby systems to Earth for the big fight.)

Careful now, pompous jerks eventually get a boot shoved up their cavernous ass.

Now, now, Frosty, let's lay off the physical threats. Anybody with any experience with the internet knows you're probably some 120lb lightweight who's fighting experience consists of a yellow belt in Tae-Kwon-Do with the little kids in the 2nd grade, and getting a grundy in freshman gym class. So forgive me if I'm not exactly shaking in my boots.

It's either valid and fine or it's a stretch, you can't have it both ways, you spineless little shit. Do you agree or disagree?

Well I'm going to have to disagree. Like I said, if someone wants to use that explanation, that's fine with me. It "works", but it is a stretch.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

A TV News crew of some repute was interviewing a man in the middle east who came to a wall every day to pray.
"Tell me, if you please, what it is you pray for at this wall, Sir?" asked the interviewer.
"Peace," the old man answered with a smile.
"And after all these years, what does it feel like?" The newsman asked.

"Like I'm talking to a wall"

 

[sea_monkey]

Ah, yes, of course, Privateers status as a 'spinoff game' certainly puts its reliablity well below the ravings of some guy at a message board.

Point being that quote is all you've got. There's NOTHING else in the games that suggests that all these colonies have hundreds of spare fighters laying around. In fact, there's a lot to suggest there isn't -- specifically the fact that you never see this massive fighter force.

It would be one thing if the quote directly stated the existence of such a large fighter force, in a game directed by Chris Roberts. But as it is, it's no more conclusive than Victory Streak's implying that Confed turns out a lot of 2nd lieutenants at 17.

(It's also hard to believe that you're asking why only two fighters scramble at Caernarvon (Gwynedd is the system)... given that the entire process is seen in the game (Blair recieves SOS while working in the comm room and personally assigns himself and Shadow to save the Concordia)

So ... hundreds of ISS pilots sat on their butts while Blair ran to the flight deck, changed into his flight gear, got aboard a craft, took off, and then didn't come back? Yeah right.

That scene only really makes sense unless there isn't very many fighters/pilots aboard the station and Blair really had to get in the cockpit in order to save the Concordia. The dialogue makes no sense if he could have just ordered the station to scramble all 400 fighters. Why would it make any difference at all who was the best pilot if there were 400 of them?

I don't think you said anything about reviews. You said you wouldn't like it because of some sort of percieved geeky tech complaint.

Actually all I said was that I suspect I'd like the book the least, based on what I'd heard. Which you called unenlightened, while admitting you do the same thing.

(Add to this the fact that thirty was a number you made up specifically to look lower than the amount of Kilrathi fighters that needed to be destroyed/disabled... and the fact that the later attack from the remaining carrier groups involves no destroyers or corvettes...)

Actually I started with the number of lost pilots (14), and rather generously doubled it to account for ejected pilots. Even then, the number is still insignificant. You're arguing that Confed traded some 30 planes for *at least* 48 bombers (I don't find that bit from False Colors particularly convincing, because I *know* in other books, carriers carried a heck of a lot more than 8-16 "torpedo-capable" craft), plus all of the capital ships attacking Olympus, plus the majority of the bombers fighter cover -- which, sense you've lowered the # of bombers to 48, is probably on the order of 100-150 fighters.

(In fact, this fits rather well with the rest of the series... since Blair+Wingmen engage a grand total of 30 bombers in the two Ghorah Khar missions... roughly the number that would be included in the final two carrier wings.)

Why are you counting the Sharm system as part of the Olympus offensive? There were *four* Gothri in Ghorah Khar 2E, which as you've mentioned many times, are jump capable. So we still have 28-32 torpedo capable enemy fighters unaccounted for by your reasoning. Plus the other line ships ... unless you are arguing a Kilrathi carrier group consists of 1 carrier and 1 cruiser.

If you eject after you destroy K'Tithrak Mang you get the 'pilot captured' screen. When the game wants to force you to land, it doesn't allow you to keep playing the game

That's if the programmers of SO1 thought of it, which I sincerely doubt they did. Face it, it's a glitch.

Line warships engage other line warships, even in the context of a carrier battlegroup. My destroyer will attack your destroyer, your cruiser will attack my cruiser and so forth.

That's nice, but I wasn't talking about that. I asked how would the presence of escort ships change the scenario where X number of bombers attacks 3 cruisers vs. 1 carrier. I don't see how it makes any difference at all.

 

[Frosty]

LOL at getting mad at some guy over the internet. You're funny man.

More like I just hate you, because you're dumb.

Cruisers and destroyers in WC can carry fighters and bombers, large numbers in fact.

Actually, no they can't. Although I'm dying to see you try to prove that.

That is why carriers aren't *as* important in WC -- the degree to which is debateable, the fact that they aren't really isn't.

You're right, they aren't as important - they're more important, because their strike craft are insanely more effective at killing people and breaking things than their WW2 equivalents.

No they aren't you silly Billy. It's a piece of fiction.

That's sort of the crux of my whole argument, you little mongoloid. Specifically because it's fiction, the novels can be nothing but the truth within the context of Wing Commander, since they are Wing Commander.

Well besides cruisers that is.

Carriers are cruisers. And no, non-carrier warships of any kind do not make up the bulk of the forces' striking power in Wing Commander. Immediately after the war begins everything shifts toward a major focus on carriers and their attack craft.

And like I said before, once the carriers are AT the battle of this magnitude, they've done their job. They're a secondary target ... the primary target being the capship and base killing strike craft, plus the Earth killing cruisers and destroyers armed with nukes.

Their job isn't done until they've recovered whatever fighters remain from the wings they launched at the outset. Beyond that, most carriers mount a not-inconsequential array of guns themselves, so they're far from useless after their fighters have launched.

And since we were talking about the Battle of Earth in that bit, the number of carriers is largely irrelevant for Confed since the fighters can rally from other bases in the solar system.

It has already been explained to you, pea-brain, that this isn't as easy as you make it sound. The vast majority of the garrison forces would have been farther from Earth than the Kilrathi themselves, and, having launched from stationary bases, would have necessarily been much slower to arrive than the carriers.

A carrier can serve as an effective base but its not like the number of them is going to be a critical determining point in the battle.

Except the number of them has a direct impact on the number of fighters and attack ships, which are the premiere offensive weapons in Wing Commander. The number of participating carriers fairly specifically influences the outcome.

Now, now, Frosty, let's lay off the physical threats.

That wasn't a physical threat. I was trying to get across that if you act like a bitch too much, you're going to get banned, but I figured that was outside the bounds of my authority to announce. But since you're too stupid to take a hint, I'll just come right out and say it.

Anybody with any experience with the internet...

Jesus Christ, dude, could you sound any more fucking stupid?

...knows you're probably some 120lb lightweight who's fighting experience consists of a yellow belt in Tae-Kwon-Do with the little kids in the 2nd grade, and getting a grundy in freshman gym class.

...Yeah. Finding information about me isn't exactly rocket science, and I can assure you that I'm none of those things.

Well I'm going to have to disagree. Like I said, if someone wants to use that explanation, that's fine with me. It "works", but it is a stretch.

If you disagree, then you can't think it works. If it works, you have no cause to disagree. You suck.

Point being that quote is all you've got.

Why does he need more? You don't even have that, genius. All you've got is a bunch of numbers you made up in your head which directly contradict the canon because it "fits you" better. How is that anywhere near as authoritative as a fucking in-game statement of fact?

There's NOTHING else in the games that suggests that all these colonies have hundreds of spare fighters laying around. In fact, there's a lot to suggest there isn't -- specifically the fact that you never see this massive fighter force.

Explanations about the limitations of the graphics engines and hardware of the period aside, everyone knows that just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not there. There's a WRX in my garage. That's the only statement on this whole forum that seems to indicate the contents of my garage, and you've never seen the car, but that doesn't make it untrue.

It would be one thing if the quote directly stated the existence of such a large fighter force, in a game directed by Chris Roberts.

So I guess Prophecy and Secret Ops are entirely apocryphal in your estimation? Actually, don't answer that, I'm sure I don't want to know. Of course, going by that attitude, you probably take the movie pretty seriously. Don't answer that either.

That's if the programmers of SO1 thought of it, which I sincerely doubt they did. Face it, it's a glitch.

Worst. Argument. Ever.

I don't see how it makes any difference at all.

They are weapons. In a battle. Golly, I don't see how that makes a difference at all.

You're a fucking genius.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Point being that quote is all you've got. There's NOTHING else in the games that suggests that all these colonies have hundreds of spare fighters laying around. In fact, there's a lot to suggest there isn't -- specifically the fact that you never see this massive fighter force.

The quote isn't "all I've got" - I've cited novels, manuals, hint books and events in games themselves. You've just decided to ignore all of this for some reason. Because, you know, "I don't see it, so it can't exist! And anything that states it does is wrong!" is the best argument ever.

It would be one thing if the quote directly stated the existence of such a large fighter force, in a game directed by Chris Roberts. But as it is, it's no more conclusive than Victory Streak's implying that Confed turns out a lot of 2nd lieutenants at 17.

You almost certainly don't mean "directed by", as this would limit you to only Wing Commanders III and IV and only in a manner which has absolutely nothing to do with fictional content. (Before we go any further, Chris' credits for Privateer are 'Original Concept' and 'Executive Producer'... he had about as much to do with Privateer as he did with Wing 2.)

(I'm not sure what your fixation with Victory Streak's ages is... clearly Maniac's is wrong, given his established history. It's not "horribly" wrong from a fictional perspective - young lieutenants would certainly exist twenty years into a war. The origin of the numbers isn't even mysterious - it's just the ages from the initial character bios they used to cast the actors...)

So ... hundreds of ISS pilots sat on their butts while Blair ran to the flight deck, changed into his flight gear, got aboard a craft, took off, and then didn't come back? Yeah right.

That scene only really makes sense unless there isn't very many fighters/pilots aboard the station and Blair really had to get in the cockpit in order to save the Concordia. The dialogue makes no sense if he could have just ordered the station to scramble all 400 fighters. Why would it make any difference at all who was the best pilot if there were 400 of them?

WE SAW THE SCENE IN REAL TIME. BLAIR DID NOT INTERACT WITH ANYONE BUT SHADOW. How do you not understand this? They even specifically cover this fact up later in the game. Don't be dumb on purpose - it isn't remotely cute.

Actually all I said was that I suspect I'd like the book the least, based on what I'd heard. Which you called unenlightened, while admitting you do the same thing.

Don't mince words, if I had called it anything I'd have called it stupid. (You didn't say anything about a review - your specific issue was, quote, "I read that Forstchen decided that they had phase shields back in 2634").

Actually I started with the number of lost pilots (14), and rather generously doubled it to account for ejected pilots. Even then, the number is still insignificant. You're arguing that Confed traded some 30 planes for *at least* 48 bombers (I don't find that bit from False Colors particularly convincing, because I *know* in other books, carriers carried a heck of a lot more than 8-16 "torpedo-capable" craft), plus all of the capital ships attacking Olympus, plus the majority of the bombers fighter cover -- which, sense you've lowered the # of bombers to 48, is probably on the order of 100-150 fighters.

I'm fairly sure we don't see any details about Kilrathi carrier complements in other books. You're welcome to quote something to prove me wrong, if you like. I'm also pretty sure the fact that you consider numbers you've made up "generous" has absolutely nothing to do with the reality of any situation.

Why are you counting the Sharm system as part of the Olympus offensive? There were *four* Gothri in Ghorah Khar 2E, which as you've mentioned many times, are jump capable. So we still have 28-32 torpedo capable enemy fighters unaccounted for by your reasoning. Plus the other line ships ... unless you are arguing a Kilrathi carrier group consists of 1 carrier and 1 cruiser.

Because the Gothri there were Khasra's squadron. Khasra was in command of the fleets attacking Ghorah Khar. That's why he was there. By my "reasoning" (the 'generous' 16 fighters per carrier - and if a made up number is 'generous', it has to be true!^1), there are *two* bombers unaccounted for.

1 - just kidding, the number was based on facts. I know, difficult concept.

That's if the programmers of SO1 thought of it, which I sincerely doubt they did. Face it, it's a glitch.

So... now when something disagrees with you, it's because the game was developed wrong? Gee, that's amazing.

That's nice, but I wasn't talking about that. I asked how would the presence of escort ships change the scenario where X number of bombers attacks 3 cruisers vs. 1 carrier. I don't see how it makes any difference at all.

Oh - well, scroll back, it looks like we're talking about completely different scenarios. I was replying to the idea of three cruisers actually fighting a carrier.

(The 3 cruisers v. 1 carrier, using 60 bombers scenario is faulty simply because either situation must involve at least one carrier to launch the strike forces in the first place.)

Now, now, Frosty, let's lay off the physical threats. Anybody with any experience with the internet knows you're probably some 120lb lightweight who's fighting experience consists of a yellow belt in Tae-Kwon-Do with the little kids in the 2nd grade, and getting a grundy in freshman gym class. So forgive me if I'm not exactly shaking in my boots.

Once Frosty ate a baby shark.

 

[Viper61]

Well I'm going to have to disagree. Like I said, if someone wants to use that explanation, that's fine with me. It "works", but it is a stretch.

I'd like to know how its a stretch? Seems to be a round peg in a round hole to me.

That's if the programmers of SO1 thought of it, which I sincerely doubt they did. Face it, it's a glitch.

So you claim to have the power of reading minds from 1991? Can you tell me where I left my Barry Bonds rookie card? I misplaced it with a ton of other great cards around then.

Point being that quote is all you've got. There's NOTHING else in the games that suggests that all these colonies have hundreds of spare fighters laying around. In fact, there's a lot to suggest there isn't -- specifically the fact that you never see this massive fighter force.

Pretty much every one of LOAF's posts in this thread has at least one piece of evidence towards this end. I'd recant, but you can go back through and read it without me citing everything. . . besides I don't think it would do any good, four pages of denial wouldn't go away in a single summary post.

C-ya

 

[sea_monkey]

More like I just hate you, because you're dumb.

I can't even imagine getting that worked up over the internet. Especially about a VIDEO GAME. GRRRR! LOL at you, tough guy.

That's sort of the crux of my whole argument, you little mongoloid. Specifically because it's fiction, the novels can be nothing but the truth within the context of Wing Commander, since they are Wing Commander.

Actually it's the other way around. There's no "truth" Frosty, because we happen to be discussing *fiction*, which is by definition, imaginary, or not true. These "events" that we call the Wing Commander Universe only take place in people's imaginations. They are therefore, a subjective experience.

SM: Cruisers and destroyers in WC can carry fighters and bombers, large numbers in fact.

F: Actually, no they can't. Although I'm dying to see you try to prove that.

Well besides the fact that the manuals tell us that a Waterloo can carry 40 fighters, and we see one carrying Crossbow bombers, and about a billion other painfully obvious points that I shouldn't need to bring up an a room of self-professed WC experts, I guess there isn't much evidence.

That wasn't a physical threat. I was trying to get across that if you act like a bitch too much, you're going to get banned, but I figured that was outside the bounds of my authority to announce. But since you're too stupid to take a hint, I'll just come right out and say it.

I'd laugh if I got banned. #1, it's funny enough that you guys would have to resort to banning someone just because you didn't agree with what they said, and #2, even funnier that you imagine that this represents some sort of power you have. Oh nooo, don't kick me out of your little Wing Commander club.

Why does he need more? You don't even have that, genius. All you've got is a bunch of numbers you made up in your head which directly contradict the canon because it "fits you" better. How is that anywhere near as authoritative as a fucking in-game statement of fact? ... There's a WRX in my garage. That's the only statement on this whole forum that seems to indicate the contents of my garage, and you've never seen the car, but that doesn't make it untrue.

You must have missed this argument, but Loaf seems to have stopped pushing the idea that "you can prove a negative." So you see my logic-challenged friend, it's not MY job to prove there ISN'T a 100,000 fighter force -- it's YOUR job to prove there IS.

And your sole piece of evidence is a quote that indirectly references said fighter force. That's it. Nothing else from the games or books suggests there are hundreds of fighters at every colony. In fact there is a lot to suggest their absence.

The quote isn't "all I've got" - I've cited novels, manuals, hint books and events in games themselves. You've just decided to ignore all of this for some reason. Because, you know, "I don't see it, so it can't exist! And anything that states it does is wrong!" is the best argument ever.

Why don't you post all this conclusive evidence for a 100,000 fighter force in a nice little numbered list so it can be made fun of all at once.

WE SAW THE SCENE IN REAL TIME. BLAIR DID NOT INTERACT WITH ANYONE BUT SHADOW. How do you not understand this? They even specifically cover this fact up later in the game. Don't be dumb on purpose - it isn't remotely cute.

That's exactly my point. Why did Blair -- in the commo room -- decide the best way to save the Concordia was to NOT TELL THE OTHER 398 PILOTS THAT YOU SAY WERE SITTING AROUND ON CAERNERVON DOING NOTHING, run down to the flight deck, change into his flight gear, and take on the Kilrathi himself? How could you possibly think that makes ANY sense AT ALL?

(I'm not sure what your fixation with Victory Streak's ages is... clearly Maniac's is wrong, given his established history.

According to you, that number is Victory Streak is canon. It's undeniable PROOF Maniac is 17 in 2654.

SM: Actually all I said was that I suspect I'd like the book the least, based on what I'd heard. Which you called unenlightened, while admitting you do the same thing.

BL: Don't mince words, if I had called it anything I'd have called it stupid. (You didn't say anything about a review - your specific issue was, quote, "I read that Forstchen decided that they had phase shields back in 2634").

LOL. It's one thing that you can't even read correctly what I write, but now you can't even remember what you said? Here's the exchange exactly, quote:

SM: I never read Action Stations but from what I hear I'd probably like that book the least.

BL: That's certainly an enlightened attitude. (Seriously, though, I can't really imagine forming my opinion of something based only on how another Wing Commander fan describes it...)

So in summary: Loaf doesn't go to a movie because he didn't like the reviews = okay. Someone doesn't read a WC book because he didn't like the reviews = unenlightened.

I'm fairly sure we don't see any details about Kilrathi carrier complements in other books. You're welcome to quote something to prove me wrong, if you like. I'm also pretty sure the fact that you consider numbers you've made up "generous" has absolutely nothing to do with the reality of any situation.

I actually used the number another poster came up with. But like I said, it really doesn't matter what the number is. Your argument is that Confed traded 14 pilots for 3 carrier groups worth of strike craft and line vessels.

Oh - well, scroll back, it looks like we're talking about completely different scenarios. I was replying to the idea of three cruisers actually fighting a carrier.

(The 3 cruisers v. 1 carrier, using 60 bombers scenario is faulty simply because either situation must involve at least one carrier to launch the strike forces in the first place.)

Yes, that is what you were replying to, saying it was stupid. I said I don't agree, but regardless, what about the scenario where we pit both forces against the same enemy (60 bombers) instead of each other? Your response ... uh dude 3 cruisers would never face 1 carrier.

I'd like to know how its a stretch? Seems to be a round peg in a round hole to me.

It's an excuse to try to make Forstchen's bad writing fit. You have to invent rationalizations for why a contradiction (phase shields/torpedoes were new in WC2, phase shields/torpedoes were new in 2634) is not actually a contradiction.

So you claim to have the power of reading minds from 1991? Can you tell me where I left my Barry Bonds rookie card? I misplaced it with a ton of other great cards around then.

So let me guess. When Thrakhath's face comes out all messed up in that scene in SO1, that's NOT a glitch. He's SUPPOSED to look like that.

Pretty much every one of LOAF's posts in this thread has at least one piece of evidence towards this end. I'd recant, but you can go back through and read it without me citing everything. . . besides I don't think it would do any good, four pages of denial wouldn't go away in a single summary post.

Loaf includes "evidence", but much of the time it's simply irrelevant or doesn't make his point. He spent quite a bit of time explaining to everyone that it is in fact possible to prove a negative, posting "evidence" the whole time.

LOL @ denial. First of all, when I've been wrong about something, I've admitted it. Loaf still hasn't conceded to being blatantly wrong about proving negatives. Second, I've been careful to stress that since Wing Commander is an imaginary universe that only takes place in people's imaginations, I respect their viewpoints even if I don't agree. The "argument" would effectively be OVER if the response had been "well I disagree because of X,Y,Z but I can see where you're coming from."

The thing is some posters on here seem to take deadly offense to the idea that "their" Wing Commander is not the TRUE Wing Commander -- like some kind of a crazy cult. I was joking when I mentioned the "Church of Wing Commander", but I think people got mad because I hit a nerve. Oh well, if the shoe fits ...

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I'd laugh if I got banned. #1, it's funny enough that you guys would have to resort to banning someone just because you didn't agree with what they said, and #2, even funnier that you imagine that this represents some sort of power you have. Oh nooo, don't kick me out of your little Wing Commander club.

I'm pretty sure no one who has the capacity to ban you has actually threatened to do so. In fact, I seem to recall specifically telling you that we don't ban people based on how stupid their opinion is when you got all haughty that some other non-moderator (LeHah) said the same thing.

Why don't you post all this conclusive evidence for a 100,000 fighter force in a nice little numbered list so it can be made fun of all at once.

Oh, this will be fun. I will do this, but I'd like you to first promise that you will address each point rather than ignore them or claim that X product 'doesn't matter'.

That's exactly my point. Why did Blair -- in the commo room -- decide the best way to save the Concordia was to NOT TELL THE OTHER 398 PILOTS THAT YOU SAY WERE SITTING AROUND ON CAERNERVON DOING NOTHING, run down to the flight deck, change into his flight gear, and take on the Kilrathi himself? How could you possibly think that makes ANY sense AT ALL?

That's an interesting way to look at it - even ignoring the pure "that's clearly just how it happened, despite the fact that you actually see heavier fighters sitting on the flight deck" factor. It has several flaws, though:

Specifically, 398 pilots aren't doing nothing. It's a fun idiotic visual that you can picture in your head, but it isn't a realistic claim. You don't build starbases with huge fighter complements because you're looking for a place to keep your fighters. There's a reason for them to be there. A whole lot of these ships will be flying ordinary patrols, escort missions, etc. When the station goes on alert, a large number of these fighters will be readied to defend the base itself. Add to this the fact that the station had already begun fighting the Kilrathi - Blair and Shadow discovered them in Gwynedd A. The bases resources are almost certainly being used to deal with this threat.

Now, we see ships with big complements throughout these games... the Tiger's Claw has 104 fighters, but it uses only two to attack huge enemy starbases and planet-killing dreadnaughts. Same with the Concordia. It's a gameplay limit and it's a fun issue... and ultimately it's how the Wing Commander universe works. If you can accept that the Concordia will later send Blair and a wingman alone to blow up enemy fuel depots and cruisers then you certainly can't possibly be horrified by the fact that the base (err, Blair himself) sent him and Shadow to deal with five Sartha.

According to you, that number is Victory Streak is canon. It's undeniable PROOF Maniac is 17 in 2654.

I don't think that's what canon means, though. Even if it were, Claw Marks is equally canon - the issue is a fun point for debating, not an excuse to stick your head in the sand and pretend that manuals don't exist.

So in summary: Loaf doesn't go to a movie because he didn't like the reviews = okay. Someone doesn't read a WC book because he didn't like the reviews = unenlightened.

I note you stopped actually quoting when you realized how the exchange actually went. Note that what I accused you of ("based only on how another Wing Commander fan describes it") and what I said about reviews ("professional reviews") are in no way equivalent.

I actually used the number another poster came up with. But like I said, it really doesn't matter what the number is. Your argument is that Confed traded 14 pilots for 3 carrier groups worth of strike craft and line vessels.

Yes, that is my argument.

It's interesting that you've gone through great lengths to make it sound ridiculous, given that your claim is presumably that Confed traded 14 pilots for 3 Fralthra and their fighter complements (and some bombers that came from nowhere).

It's an excuse to try to make Forstchen's bad writing fit. You have to invent rationalizations for why a contradiction (phase shields/torpedoes were new in WC2, phase shields/torpedoes were new in 2634) is not actually a contradiction.

The rationalization exists without taking into account any of the novels, though; refer back to Viper's original post on the matter.

So let me guess. When Thrakhath's face comes out all messed up in that scene in SO1, that's NOT a glitch. He's SUPPOSED to look like that.

Ah, what a wonderful argument. I can prove that 'glitches' exist, therefore can attribute anything I want to being a 'glitch'! I can prove that my cat is orange, therefore anything I say is orange is!

(And yes, some versions of the game displaying the wrong graphic is distinctly different from you not liking which ejection scene they picked for a given mission. We can, for instance, pinpoint exactly how and why the 'mixed up graphics' bug occurs.)

 

[Fruitcake]

Look, Seamonkey and all the others here: I don't understand what's been feeding this discussion for so long. Yes, the games and the books and manuals are not in all cases 'canon'. These errors are either glitches but mostly technical impossibilities at the time. Or gameplay adjustments.
Take the Torpedo concept. After developing WC1 the Origin team probably thought taking out capships was too easy and needed to be harder and more 'realistic'... So they came up with the 20 seconds Torpedo Run, where you could first do 20 seconds Mass Driver run to take care of a Ralathi.
Something like that of course had to be incorporated into the story. Thus they came up with: 'Phase Shields'.
The odds that you faced in WC 1,2 & 3 weren't canon with the novels (evenly matched Confed and Kilrathi) because the AI just wasn't good enough. Origin needed a lot of fighters to make the game interesting and fun to play.
With the amount of ships you take down in these three games, you could say that Confed had the technological upper hand, or that the Kilrathi had cheaper ships. Both never comes forward in the games, so that pisses most fans off. The only solution is in your head, come to peace with it. Think what you want that makes the most sense to you, but don't try to force it onto others.
The truth is, that there is no truth. As the WC-Universe is fictional and if Origin isn't helping us out with the details, a discussion like this can last forever.

 

[SabreAce]

I just had to get involved

Actually it's the other way around. There's no "truth" Frosty, because we happen to be discussing *fiction*, which is by definition, imaginary, or not true. These "events" that we call the Wing Commander Universe only take place in people's imaginations. They are therefore, a subjective experience.

As has already been said before, it's not subjective. Origin said "this is what happened", so that's what happened. Pretend it's Star Trek. You can't just decide "Oh, I don't like Season 3 of Deep Space 9, so it never happened." Paramount has said that if something appeared on screen, then yes, it happened, and yes, it's canon. Likewise, Origin has said that what appears in the various WC games (yes, including Privateer) and the novels is canon.

Well besides the fact that the manuals tell us that a Waterloo can carry 40 fighters, and we see one carrying Crossbow bombers, and about a billion other painfully obvious points that I shouldn't need to bring up an a room of self-professed WC experts, I guess there isn't much evidence.

Yes...40 light fighters. Compare a fleet carrier carrying 100 heavy fighters and bombers with a Waterloo crusier with 40 Ferrets and Epees (the specific fighters were mentioned by Major Edmund during SO1, as well as being what Blair encounters). And as for the bombers, the Gettysburg was a special situation, where they were evaluating the Crossbow. Ordinarilly, such ships wouldn't be assigned to cruisers.

The thing is some posters on here seem to take deadly offense to the idea that "their" Wing Commander is not the TRUE Wing Commander -- like some kind of a crazy cult. I was joking when I mentioned the "Church of Wing Commander", but I think people got mad because I hit a nerve. Oh well, if the shoe fits ...

Except it's not "their" Wing Commander that's being argued about - it's the Wing Commander that has the Origin seal of approval as being canon. Saying "I don't like this, so here's my version" is almost as bad as "I didn't like the Rapier II, so I made an uber-fanboy-fighter with 300 neutron guns and 50 missiles".