Favorite Confed Cruiser (Kilrathi-War Era)...

Favorite Confed-Cruiser (Kilrathi-War Era)

  • Talahassee-Class

    Votes: 9 42.9%
  • Gettysburg-Class

    Votes: 3 14.3%
  • Waterloo-Class

    Votes: 9 42.9%

  • Total voters


Peace Through Superior Firepower
O.K. I guess my favorite cruiser is actually a destroyer.:(

To each his own as they say.

By the way, you can blow up all the Victory's escort ships and nothing happens to you. And the next mission they're all back. Seems like a flaw in the program or something.

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
The Talahassee is the WC3-Cruiser (TCS-Ajax)

It's "Tallahassee", like the city in Florida.

She's a 30-something year-old cruiser.

The phrase "30-something year-old" means very little without a frame of reference. Did they enter service in the 1970s? The Tallahassee class entered service in the mid-thirties.

but it's said that they can wedge six-fighters in the ship.

Four. The Tallahassee class carries a four fighter half-squadron.

It's specs are not certain, in fact it's appearance isn't even.

Except for when WE SEE IT.

If Bandit (LOAF) is right, it looks like a really big Exeter-Class (I think most likely the game-designers didn't feel like making a new ship, and decided to scale up an Exeter instead).

How are these two concepts in at all mutually exclusive?

It's bigger than the Bengal-Class which means it's over 700 meters (most Bengals are 690, but Zach Colson was saying that it's a bigger ship than the Tiger's-Claw too). Bandit (LOAF) stated that it's rougly comparible to the Concordia Supercruisers from the Movie, which yields a size of about 850-860 meters. It's probably the biggest war-era WC Cruiser. No idea what it's capabilities are. I guess it's like the USS Long-Beach CGN of Wing Commander (the USS Long-Beach, CGN-9, is a 721 or so foot-long cruiser).

I think you're having size issues... while nicely measurable in movies and such, the *length* of a ship really isn't an comparable trait. I could lay out a thousand meters of string, and in your estimation it'd make a *fine* warship. When comparing the *size* of a ship, the value you want to look at is the *mass*. The masses of the Waterloo and Tallahassee classes are very similar (18,200 and 19,500 tonnes respectively)... and both are dwarved by the Concordia SuperCruiser (73,000 tonnes).

I don't know what the hell happened with WC2-- the fighters got tiny, the Cruisers carry fighters, and even the Ralatha carried 23 fighters, but Waterloo's carry 40 fighters-- that's as much as the Ranger-Class CVL.

You're looking at this non-linearly. It's not like ships suddenly appeared in 2665 that could carry fighters -- they existed earlier in the timeline as well.

They do carry WC2 AMG's, and these are the kind that bypass shields, not the slow-moving yellow bolts which do 300 points of damage, but don't bypass shields.

Same gun, different engines. The shield technology in the WC3 era has counteracted the AMGs.

I think these things were probably superior in every way to the CVE's except speed.

*Everything* is superior in every way to a CVE... except in cost. Which is the point.

Honestly, they should have just souped up a bunch of Waterloo's and used them as Escort Carriers, they would have been able to carry Broadswords, and Cruisers are plentiful.

Waterloo class cruisers *weren't* plentiful, though. According to End Run they're counted as regular carriers with regards to scarcity.


Vice Admiral
Speaking of the Super-Cruisers, I'm wondering why there was no like of them in WC. Now, I know that the Concordia class was a new concept put in for the movie, but I'm looking aside from that. Could it be because it was a ship of a 'battleship era' that the Terran Confederaton had and hadn't yet switched its naval strategy around carriers?