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 ...