Concordia (Confederation Dreadnought) sister ships?

Dragon1

Rear Admiral
Well, that's your opinion, and I won't argue with it . But keep in mind, this is a game where you fly a space fighter. The advantage of super-powerful fleet killing weaponry is that it doesn't hurt the player - it's just a plot device. On the other hand, giving the enemy real firepower would cause no end of trouble, because at the end of the day, you still want the player to be able to kill an enemy capship single-handedly...
Good point. I guess I was just hoping to see something in Prophecy totally alien as opposed to the very familiar Kilrathi like missions. It was cool though how it required several missions to take out an enemy carrier or cruiser in WCP.
 

Viper61

Spaceman
ChrisReid said:
LOAF's entire point is that it's an extremely low possibility. The whole implication that all nonzero possibilities are equally valid is absurd.
Its not that all non-zero possibilities are equally valid, it’s that all non-zero possibilities are still viable possibilities. Its so much more likely that the Austerlitz is a Concordia-class, but because it’s a 6% chance (from LOAF’s ‘low’ 6 CDN number, not really an accurate way of looking at it since we have no idea how many were actually built, but one of the only ways we have – 2% by my minimum number of 3 to make sure what we know about the WC universe actually makes sense) of happening means that it can happen (especially given we don't know how many were constructed).
Bandit LOAF said:
(which, of course, was the goal of 'removing' it from the continuity in the first place)
A simple “Concordia being the last of her line” sentence from an-always-remorseful-about-the-old-days Blair in the WC3N or WC4N would have sealed it for every debate from there on out if that was the original intention. The PTC being decommissioned just ‘limited’ the spread of the ‘evil’ one-shot kill (but “oh by the way, by the time your given the opportunity to use it, you might blow yourself up”) technology. Which, the PTC retirement reason of ‘continual problems’ would have to include problems we aren’t aware of or the PTC fire button would just have had a “Do not press if your reactor is below XX% power!” label placed above it. Wonder gun it is not.
Apparently, they wanted to remove this technology from the timeline so much that they later went to the bullpen again and called up the perky, but always error-prone (and now uber-powered), “single shot fleet-kill weapon” for Prophecy.
Bandit LOAF said:
Also, your earlier observation that the Concordia was 'bulkier' than the Tiger's Claw was incorrect: based on their silhouettes, the Terran Confederation-class is only ~20 meters wider than the Bengal-class.
Gotcha. My mistake.

Bandit LOAF said:
I find it hard to believe that you "find increasingly more problematic", given that you've just gone on about how you think yards are built for specific classes of ships (despite any conclusive or even suggestive evidence to support this idea).
I do think that yards are built for specific classes (or there would be no reason to build the same ship for years on end, you dream up a replacement with a little bit better stats and “boom” you get to build it tomorrow, so to speak. Seems to work fine for the CDN as a carrier under your reasoning), but you don’t. The full phrase is “something I find increasingly more problematic if you want to believe a new design can instantly replace an old one”. I find it problematic under your vision of what takes place.

Bandit LOAF said:
(In terms of the Concordia-class ships, I generally attempt to go by the same ship list on which Origin has referred for Secret Ops. This is, of course, not really canon -- but it's one of those things that it's perhaps better to abide than not. I would throw it out the minute it's contradicted in the future, of course, but that doesn't seem likely to happen in the immediate future. Of course, it calls the Austerlitz Concordia-class, too...).
Then why wasn’t this great little nugget of “non”-canon slipped in way earlier in this debate? Would have been great point to consider in if I was actually justified in spending my time proving that a CDN can exist post BoT. Why isn’t the plethora of Pre-BoT information reflected in the carrier list (besides all the post WC4 stuff which I would guess at least a portion of which comes from this source)? The “along the same lines of canon” WC bible (for internal use by Origin sanctioned products) seems to make the cut with the Jutland class (its only reference IIRC being the WC Bible) showing up (under the assumption it’s the replacement for the Bengal - which didn’t make the list in the first place, so I have a little bit of difficulty wrapping my brain around why its replacement gets bumped up to “fleet carrier” status). Why ignore something that is “better to abide than not” when other more error-ridden sources have made the grade?
Bandit LOAF said:
That said, I don't see how one carrier surviving 34 years of war makes it probable that another carrier more likely to survive compared to its contemporaries. The Ark Royal doesn't have a giant space magnet that increases the probability that the Austerlitz as opposed to fifty eight other carriers survives for longer. (Or that makes the Austerlitz Terran Confederation-class to begin with...)). To put it another way - it's improbable (perhaps) that the Ark Royal survives however many battles its in -- but that doesn't make it *more* probable that any other specific carrier would survive (because you can apply the same logic to the Viper or the Washington or any of the other field of ships). I'm no mathamagician, but I'm pretty sure probability doesn't work that way at all. Flipping heads ten times in a row doesn't affect the fact that I have a 50% chance of getting it the eleventh time.
Well, I somehow got out of college with a minor in Mathemagics and I really have a problem wrapping my brain around the usage of permutations, combinations, when to use factorials of what, etc etc when it comes to probability, so don’t feel bad :).
Nothing I said about the Ark Royal has a direct link to proving the Austerlitz is a CDN. Your right, probability doesn’t work that way (although there is the ultra slim chance that the coin will land on its side, making both heads and tails a little less than a 50% probability- I know I hate that stupid example too). What I was picking at is your stance that, since its not very likely the Austerlitz is a CDN (6% by your numbers) that it shouldn’t be considered an option. Wing Commander is full of long odds situations, almost to the point that they are the rule :D. Do you really want to calculate what the odds of Tarawa pulling off what they did in ER were? Or take a shot at Tolwyn stopping the Hakaga’s and company in FA? Since we can’t really apply weighting to the chances of events happening in our favorite fictional universe, all we can use are the raw “alive/dead/produced“ carrier numbers, which is what was done in the 1 out of 15 chances the Austerlitz is a CDN number. Its highly improbable that the Ark Royal survived, but it did (1.5% - raw numbers), just an onhand example of how long shots in the WC universe are not unheard of. If we really had the stats to get complicated, you could take the raw numbers for every engagement the Ark Royal was in and stack them up against each other. With the cumulative nature of probability, I don’t think you would come out any better since it lasts through 35 years of engagements – though not continual – and with its initial engagement, its chances IIRC have already dipped down to only a 50% chance of surviving (actually slightly greater than that since the Concordia already had 1 or 2 torpedoes in her, but that starts adding weighting factors which can’t really be done without getting way in over our heads, but you get the idea.
Using the same idea, given we knew the outcome of Vukar Tag (3 of 4 survive) and the BoT (2 of 7), the TCS Concordia initially only has a 21% chance of surviving both (it being the only carrier to fight in both engagements). That’s only 2 engagements in an “illustrious” career. If we started doing the math for the opponents it faced one on one (or in larger battlegroups) throughout its tenure and factored in the strength of the carriers faced at both major engagements, that number would begin to fall rapidly.
Doesn’t matter how low the percentage is, you can still get there in the end (and in quite a few of WC situations, the outcome is usually a very low probability result). So even though a possibility is low, can it never happen? Of course not.
Bandit LOAF said:
First, read what you've quoted: criticalmass didn't ask about "post-BoT"; he asked about "2673-2681" (post-war). There's yet another layer of improbability here -- that Confed is keeping their faulty, crippled dreadnaught around while scrapping large portions of the fleet.
That is true, I misread what ciritcalmass asked. The answer still couldn’t be no, though. The percentages just keep going down but there is always the possibility.

Bandit LOAF said:
Had criticalmass asked your question, I would still say no. Anything is *possible* if you go through ridiculous lengths to make it true - if you want to have a Terran Confederation dreadnaught in Wing Commander III you can make up an elaborate story. Yes, the Confederation could secretly build more dreadnaughts without us ever hearing a reference to them... they can even have an amazing fixed gun that we've never heard of! Hell, our story can involve time travel if you want -- we can cite some Privateer 2 references for that.

Hard ons for the superships do not justify reintroducing them just because you want to show off a 3D model or have your Mary Sue be captain of a giant space gun.

(Ooh, oooh, no, we'll do The Final Countdown in the Wing Commander universe. The TCS Concordia will travel back in time to Space Pearl Harbor and fight the Kilrathi.)
You can come up with any elaborate way you want to try and dismiss the possibility or gripe about “ridiculous lengths” but the direct from simple deduction bottom line is still true about the Austerlitz and can be summed up in 2 simple questions.
Can the Austerlitz survive the BoT? Yes, 3 carriers were killed in drydock with 4 (or 5/6, depending on what you count as a “carrier”) possible victims. The Austerlitz or the Viking (or 1 of 2 ships whose identities we aren’t sure of) could be that ship.
What class is the Austerlitz? We don’t know (unless the SO document finds its way into becoming a canon source). From the information we have about it, it could be a Concordia-class, a Jutland-class, or a Confederation-class (in that order of likeliness).
Bandit LOAF said:
That said, it is incredibly improbable (as demonstrated) that the TCS Austerlitz is a Terran Confederation-class dreadnaught -- similarly, it goes against the spirit of removing the ships from the continuity in the first place and the very spirit of Wing Commander III itself (the Confederation is losing the war and now relying on older carriers because ships like the Concordia have been lost).
Improbable, but not impossible. If your going to keep throwing demonstrated low probability numbers out over and over again, you might try the one where Austerlitz is a CDN and survived the BoT. It’s a much lower number.
I also have no idea how this goes against WC3. Confed is losing the War because the Kilrathi just seriously ripped apart several worlds and now have a fleet of 25+ carriers and who knows how many escort ships. The Confederation is at an all time high (at least since we’ve been a part of the story and according to what has to be introduced to satisfy our sources) of 18 carriers (12 if you want to get ticky and say that everyone of the carriers that are destroyed in 2669 happen before we join WC3). 15 of those 18 carriers are less than 3 years old. How does Confed keeping its old light carriers in operation to compete with the 25+ Kilrathi carriers have anything to do with the fact that another CDN (which would be older than the majority of the fleet carriers) may have survived the BoT?

Bandit LOAF said:
(Finally - Concordia and Confederation are both words which mean alliances or unions. If I had to name others, I'd give them names like Alliance and Union... or perhaps more specific names, honoring particular present-day unions -- 'TCS Firekkan Alliance' and the like.)
Alright, I can live with that. So that makes 2 classes of pre-WC3 vessels that seem to have stayed with their naming conventions through at least 2 ships.

C-ya
 

ChrisReid

Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
Viper61 said:
Its not that all non-zero possibilities are equally valid, it’s that all non-zero possibilities are still viable possibilities. Its so much more likely that the Austerlitz is a Concordia-class, but because it’s a 6% chance (from LOAF’s ‘low’ 6 CDN number, not really an accurate way of looking at it since we have no idea how many were actually built, but one of the only ways we have – 2% by my minimum number of 3 to make sure what we know about the WC universe actually makes sense) of happening means that it can happen (especially given we don't know how many were constructed).
We're going in circles here. By calling incredible improbabilities viable, you're implying they're valid. I don't know why anyone would want to delve into such "viabilities" though. Six percent is pretty damn low, and it really doesn't do anything to enhance storytelling. The whole point here was to set a foundation for a story, and having a supercarrier with a giant fleet busting gun isn't a good foundation for a fighter pilot drama.

Viper61 said:
Apparently, they wanted to remove this technology from the timeline so much that they later went to the bullpen again and called up the perky, but always error-prone (and now uber-powered), “single shot fleet-kill weapon” for Prophecy. Gotcha. My mistake.
And immediately declared it unfit for use afterwards. Don't you see why it was done like this? It's not that superguns are always stupid. There was a reason they invented it in the first place. But they have to limit the spread or else it destroys the tension of the situation. Your sarcasm aside, the Midway using the one-instance Nephilim weapon IS a good way to keep the technology out of the Wing Commander mainstream. Coming up with scenarios for dreadnoughts to exist all over the place is not.

Viper61 said:
I do think that yards are built for specific classes (or there would be no reason to build the same ship for years on end, you dream up a replacement with a little bit better stats and “boom” you get to build it tomorrow, so to speak.
And this does happen. It happens today in real life, it happens in Wing Commander where the Tiger's Claw is an uprated special Bengal. It would be really dumb to have a yard tooled for just one class. It'd be really dumb to have any sort of production area that isn't steadily retooled for new things as they come along. A yard is just a dock. It's a place with cranes and tools and gear to build ships. It's not problematic for this place to build different kinds of carriers.

Viper61 said:
Doesn’t matter how low the percentage is, you can still get there in the end (and in quite a few of WC situations, the outcome is usually a very low probability result). So even though a possibility is low, can it never happen? Of course not.
It's not black and white though. There you go insisting remote possibilites are perfectly valid. You very rarely can prove something to 100% in a case like this. Hey, maybe that means we can ALWAYS prove something to 100%!
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
A simple “Concordia being the last of her line” sentence from an-always-remorseful-about-the-old-days Blair in the WC3N or WC4N would have sealed it for every debate from there on out if that was the original intention. The PTC being decommissioned just ‘limited’ the spread of the ‘evil’ one-shot kill (but “oh by the way, by the time your given the opportunity to use it, you might blow yourself up”) technology. Which, the PTC retirement reason of ‘continual problems’ would have to include problems we aren’t aware of or the PTC fire button would just have had a “Do not press if your reactor is below XX% power!” label placed above it. Wonder gun it is not.
Apparently, they wanted to remove this technology from the timeline so much that they later went to the bullpen again and called up the perky, but always error-prone (and now uber-powered), “single shot fleet-kill weapon” for Prophecy.
As we touched on earlier, this would be beyond the abilities or interests of a tie-in novel. The authors of the novels don't care about game mechanics and certainly would never have a reason to believe they should be removing technology from a shared universe. (On a similar note, I have my doubts as to whether or not the novelists even know the weapon exists; the Concordia is never called anything but a carrier in the books.)

The desire to get rid of the Terran Confederation-class as a practical part of the Wing Commander timeline comes from Wing Commander III. The method at the time (1994) was just not to touch the earlier technology (save explaining what happened to Concordia herself) -- when Kilrathi Saga was developed the did some practical retconning with the manual, generally in response to the past two years of fan discussion. They did things like 'fix' technological continuity and add references to the novels to the Wing Commander 2 material.

Prophecy is a good thing to bring up; they clearly learned their lesson from technologies like the Terran Confederation and Lance-classes and specifically made their plot device a "one use" plasma weapon.

I do think that yards are built for specific classes (or there would be no reason to build the same ship for years on end, you dream up a replacement with a little bit better stats and “boom” you get to build it tomorrow, so to speak. Seems to work fine for the CDN as a carrier under your reasoning), but you don’t. The full phrase is “something I find increasingly more problematic if you want to believe a new design can instantly replace an old one”. I find it problematic under your vision of what takes place.
You're arguing a donut; basing the success of one portion of your argument on my ability to argue another makes no sense.

Now, imagine if you will! Dateline Concordia. It's 2666 -- through a series of coincidences Captain Blair, the 'Coward of K'Tithrak Mang' is serving onboard the carrier. His oldest friends think he's a coward and everyone else thinks he's a traitor. More than anyone, the Admiral hates him. Luckily, he's allowing Blair to help lay out the design concept for the Navy's Midway-class Megacarrier, since they'll clearly need those to put together new yards for such a large ship.

You can't claim that shipyards are unit-specific; it does not adhere to how shipyards work today and there is no evidence of it in the Wing Commander continuity. It is a concept you created specifically to win an argument, and you need to step back and realize that that's a bad reason to create such a scenario in the first place.

Then why wasn’t this great little nugget of “non”-canon slipped in way earlier in this debate? Would have been great point to consider in if I was actually justified in spending my time proving that a CDN can exist post BoT. Why isn’t the plethora of Pre-BoT information reflected in the carrier list (besides all the post WC4 stuff which I would guess at least a portion of which comes from this source)? The “along the same lines of canon” WC bible (for internal use by Origin sanctioned products) seems to make the cut with the Jutland class (its only reference IIRC being the WC Bible) showing up (under the assumption it’s the replacement for the Bengal - which didn’t make the list in the first place, so I have a little bit of difficulty wrapping my brain around why its replacement gets bumped up to “fleet carrier” status). Why ignore something that is “better to abide than not” when other more error-ridden sources have made the grade?
Well, for one thing, the carrier chart isn't completely accurate to the c. 1998 Ships List. When we did the 'submitted' Ships List the instructions involved giving generic classes to all of the unclassified ships -- and all the possible-carriers were to be 'Concordia class'. (The current ships list currently at the CIC is *not* the same as this list; while there are some errors in the CIC list, I believe it was redone to be only 'onscreen canon'.)

As I'm sure you've noticed in the past, I'm not a huge fan of claiming non-canon sources as accurate. You hit one that I've never been content with -- the Jutland-class. I know the fans love it, but it's *not* an official designation. The carrier production list was done in the middle of Jutland-mania... I'd be happy to refer to them as Trafalgar-type CVAs.

Incidentally, doing the ships list is also where Johnny and I attached 'Ranger-class' to the TCS Victory. This, again, is something that isn't actually canon (but I would be loathe to take that one away from people).

Well, I somehow got out of college with a minor in Mathemagics and I really have a problem wrapping my brain around the usage of permutations, combinations, when to use factorials of what, etc etc when it comes to probability, so don’t feel bad .
Nothing I said about the Ark Royal has a direct link to proving the Austerlitz is a CDN. Your right, probability doesn’t work that way (although there is the ultra slim chance that the coin will land on its side, making both heads and tails a little less than a 50% probability- I know I hate that stupid example too). What I was picking at is your stance that, since its not very likely the Austerlitz is a CDN (6% by your numbers) that it shouldn’t be considered an option. Wing Commander is full of long odds situations, almost to the point that they are the rule . Do you really want to calculate what the odds of Tarawa pulling off what they did in ER were? Or take a shot at Tolwyn stopping the Hakaga’s and company in FA? Since we can’t really apply weighting to the chances of events happening in our favorite fictional universe, all we can use are the raw “alive/dead/produced“ carrier numbers, which is what was done in the 1 out of 15 chances the Austerlitz is a CDN number. Its highly improbable that the Ark Royal survived, but it did (1.5% - raw numbers), just an onhand example of how long shots in the WC universe are not unheard of. If we really had the stats to get complicated, you could take the raw numbers for every engagement the Ark Royal was in and stack them up against each other. With the cumulative nature of probability, I don’t think you would come out any better since it lasts through 35 years of engagements – though not continual – and with its initial engagement, its chances IIRC have already dipped down to only a 50% chance of surviving (actually slightly greater than that since the Concordia already had 1 or 2 torpedoes in her, but that starts adding weighting factors which can’t really be done without getting way in over our heads, but you get the idea.
Using the same idea, given we knew the outcome of Vukar Tag (3 of 4 survive) and the BoT (2 of 7), the TCS Concordia initially only has a 21% chance of surviving both (it being the only carrier to fight in both engagements). That’s only 2 engagements in an “illustrious” career. If we started doing the math for the opponents it faced one on one (or in larger battlegroups) throughout its tenure and factored in the strength of the carriers faced at both major engagements, that number would begin to fall rapidly.
Doesn’t matter how low the percentage is, you can still get there in the end (and in quite a few of WC situations, the outcome is usually a very low probability result). So even though a possibility is low, can it never happen? Of course not.
The probability that {Main Character}'s home carrier will survive anything thrown at it in a licensed tie-in novel is 100%. :)

(Unless I'm missing something, this big math paragraph doesn't have much to do with the argument. It's just an aside, right?)

You can come up with any elaborate way you want to try and dismiss the possibility or gripe about “ridiculous lengths” but the direct from simple deduction bottom line is still true about the Austerlitz and can be summed up in 2 simple questions.
Can the Austerlitz survive the BoT? Yes, 3 carriers were killed in drydock with 4 (or 5/6, depending on what you count as a “carrier”) possible victims. The Austerlitz or the Viking (or 1 of 2 ships whose identities we aren’t sure of) could be that ship.
What class is the Austerlitz? We don’t know (unless the SO document finds its way into becoming a canon source). From the information we have about it, it could be a Concordia-class, a Jutland-class, or a Confederation-class (in that order of likeliness).
The problem is that this is a *given* in discussing fiction. We cannot say with absolute certainty *anything*. There has to be a cutoff where we say that because of X, Y and Z that the answer to a question relating to fiction is yes or no. Is Spirit dead? Yes. Did Tolwyn hang himself? Yes. Does the Confederation still build Scimitars? No. We can easily create explanations that will reverse the answers to all of these questions - but that should not mean that we can never answer any questions.

In my mind, what we know about the Terran Confederation class, what we know about the carrier chart, what we know about the intent of the developers and a few other things all sited above adds up enough to allow us to say that no, they would not be around in WC3 when asked by someone who wants to write fanfic or a fan project about them.

Improbable, but not impossible. If your going to keep throwing demonstrated low probability numbers out over and over again, you might try the one where Austerlitz is a CDN and survived the BoT. It’s a much lower number.
I also have no idea how this goes against WC3. Confed is losing the War because the Kilrathi just seriously ripped apart several worlds and now have a fleet of 25+ carriers and who knows how many escort ships. The Confederation is at an all time high (at least since we’ve been a part of the story and according to what has to be introduced to satisfy our sources) of 18 carriers (12 if you want to get ticky and say that everyone of the carriers that are destroyed in 2669 happen before we join WC3). 15 of those 18 carriers are less than 3 years old. How does Confed keeping its old light carriers in operation to compete with the 25+ Kilrathi carriers have anything to do with the fact that another CDN (which would be older than the majority of the fleet carriers) may have survived the BoT?
You have no idea how the idea that Confed is still fielding amazing dreadnaughts goes against the spirit of a game that literally starts with the image of a Terran Confederation-class ship crashed into a planet followed by Blair's transfer to a much lesser ship as evidence that the Confederation is losing the war?

The Victory reference was in response to your claim that the existence of the Ark Royal somehow supports the idea that your ship is still in service. If your claim made sense it'd be supporting it; as it is, it's just evidence that there are carriers out there that survived for the entire war.

Alright, I can live with that. So that makes 2 classes of pre-WC3 vessels that seem to have stayed with their naming conventions through at least 2 ships.
Now, now, you don't need the "pre-WC3" disclaimer just to adhere to the post ships-list continuity; the TCS Eisen discounts the Vesuvius-class.
 

Dragon1

Rear Admiral
Prophecy is a good thing to bring up; they clearly learned their lesson from technologies like the Terran Confederation and Lance-classes and specifically made their plot device a "one use" plasma weapon
What is a Lance-class?
 

Ptarmigan

Spaceman
Quarto said:
Mind you, in-game the Shok'lar has two neutrons and two mass drivers instead... I tried giving it its proper armament once, but quickly found out why they changed it - having barely enough energy for two volleys is not my idea of a good time.

I remember the Shok'lar from Armada. Kinda looks like a Salthi, but it can cloak. I remember seeing that same fighter design in Privateer flown by Retros. The TCS Concordia of Wing Commander 2 is a Confederation-class dreadnought, 983.7 meters in length.
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
I remember the Shok'lar from Armada. Kinda looks like a Salthi, but it can cloak. I remember seeing that same fighter design in Privateer flown by Retros.
Yeah -- the 3D model was originally made for Super Wing Commander, where it appeared as the Salthi. It was also used as the "surplus" Salthi that the Kilrathi sold to the Church of Man in Privateer... and then finally it reappeared as the Shok'lar in Armada.

Actually, it did show up one other place - at the Ultima Online website once, as an April Fools joke about aliens invading Brittania.
 

Ptarmigan

Spaceman
Bandit LOAF said:
Yeah -- the 3D model was originally made for Super Wing Commander, where it appeared as the Salthi. It was also used as the "surplus" Salthi that the Kilrathi sold to the Church of Man in Privateer... and then finally it reappeared as the Shok'lar in Armada.

Actually, it did show up one other place - at the Ultima Online website once, as an April Fools joke about aliens invading Brittania.
I saw that screenshot of the Salthi/Shok'lar in Ultima Online website. :D
 

criticalmass

Vice Admiral
Bandit LOAF said:
]In my mind, what we know about the Terran Confederation class, what we know about the carrier chart, what we know about the intent of the developers and a few other things all sited above adds up enough to allow us to say that no, they would not be around in WC3 when asked by someone who wants to write fanfic or a fan project about them.
Good. Since I'm that someone, let me ask another question:
What do we know about the TCS Terran Confederation except that she might be CVS-14?

As I indeed want to write fanfic or a fan project around that ship (eventually), I'd like to go along the known facts as best as possible.
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
criticalmass said:
What do we know about the TCS Terran Confederation except that she might be CVS-14?
I'm pretty sure it's just Confederation-class, not Terran Confederation-class, actually.

Anyway, we know nothing at all about the TCS Confederation - we're assuming one exists, because every class of ship in WC seems to be named after the first ship of that class. However, keep in mind that this is not always an active-duty ship - for example, the TCS Hades was just a testbed. If I was to guess, I'd say the TCS Confederation was also just a testbed (given the experimental nature of the class)... but it is generally assumed that the TCS Confederation is the CVS-14 shown on the cover of WC2 (in which case, we know one more thing about it, namely that it took part in at least one battle against the Kilrathi :p ).
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
I'm pretty sure it's just Confederation-class, not Terran Confederation-class, actually.
The Kilrathi Saga manual calls it 'Terran Confederation-class' (in the Phase Transit Cannon writeup), so I've been referring to it as such.

Anyway, we know nothing at all about the TCS Confederation - we're assuming one exists, because every class of ship in WC seems to be named after the first ship of that class. However, keep in mind that this is not always an active-duty ship - for example, the TCS Hades was just a testbed. If I was to guess, I'd say the TCS Confederation was also just a testbed (given the experimental nature of the class)... but it is generally assumed that the TCS Confederation is the CVS-14 shown on the cover of WC2 (in which case, we know one more thing about it, namely that it took part in at least one battle against the Kilrathi ).
I think the Hades is the oddity here -- it seems unlikely that given the difficulty, expense and need for such ships that they'd build the largest carrier ever (at the time) to use as a testbed. The first of the Midway and Vesuvius-class would bear out this claim.

The only other thing we know is that it probably entered service in 2660.
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Bandit LOAF said:
The Kilrathi Saga manual calls it 'Terran Confederation-class' (in the Phase Transit Cannon writeup), so I've been referring to it as such.
Ah, I see - that's incorrect, though. If you look at the WC2 manual (which has the exact same writeup, minus the second paragraph), you'll find that "Confederation"is italicised (as is "Sivar"), while Terran is not - I'm pretty certain that "Terran" in this case simply denotes the owner.
 
Top