Flight Recorder

K

KoN21

Spaceman
I have been thinking about the mission in Episode 1, where Squealer attempts to lure you over to the pirates. The mission ends with you destroying the flight recorder and taking a lot of flak for it from Spoons, Chief Tech etc. Soon after you face Sparrow and then blow up her ship and tracter her back in.

In this mission there is no mention that you sabotaged the recorder once again. Yet if you didn't sabotage it, the captain and crew would be able to see that Sparrow was not a prisoner on board that managed to eject, but the pilot of the other ship. Am I mistaken here?
 
Once we've established that Bradshaw was willing to sabotage his flight recorder once, it would have been pointless to say it again the second time - I'm sure anybody can connect the dots and figure out that he didn't put himself in a situation where he lies about Sparrow, only to have the technicians expose his lie five minutes later.
 
Okay, this is what I figured.
Bradshaw sabotages his flight recorder in back to back missions.
Shouldn't he have taken a lot more flak, possibly face time in the brig etc?
I was wondering why he wasn't scolded or punished doing it again, since the second time in essence proves that the first time was not a fluke.
 
They're not back-to-back missions (it's missions 4 and 6/7 we're talking about), but yeah, I imagine that had anybody really thought about it, they could've figured it out - Spoons certainly did. I haven't really thought about how Bradshaw got away with it, but I suppose there's a few possibilities that you can choose from:

1. It simply didn't occur to anyone. Bradshaw was a good officer and all, and certainly there was no reason to suspect him of being involved with the pirates. It's hard to find something you're not looking for, even if it's in plain sight.

2. If Bradshaw flew the Sabre, it might not have had the flight recorder switched on in the first place - it had only just been salvaged from the station, and all the techs had time to do is fuel her up.

3. Jean (the tech) figured it out - and helped Bradshaw cover it up, since he'd just rescued her brother (...was he a hostage, or a defector?), after all.

4. The incident was reported, but either the Captain or somebody even higher up decided to cover it up. I doubt this would have happened out of sympathy (everybody understood the defecting pilots' anger - but since Confed crewmen died during the raid, there would have been no sympathy as such), but... we do know that if you don't cover for Sparrow, she still gets off the hook somehow (and Squealer, for whom you cannot cover in the first place, gets off the hook anyhow). Heck, if you don't cover for Sparrow, Bradshaw notes that one thing they didn't charge her with was treason. It's likely the whole thing was swept under the rug because of how embarassing it was (pirates, robbing a carrier!), and because the Kilrathi could have used the incident to force even faster disarmament. After all, if Confed pilots can turn to piracy at a moment's notice...

And no, no one of these explanations is "official", whatever that would mean with a fan project; we don't need to decide what really happened out there, so we're quite happy to leave it to everyone to interpret as they like. However, one thing is certain - whether or not Bradshaw's sabotage was detected and reported, some covering-up further on in the chain of command must have taken place, since otherwise, there's no way Squealer (and Sparrow) could have avoided getting executed for treason.

(so how does this fit with Bradshaw facing execution if he defects? Good question :p)
 
I don't want to sound nit picky but I've noticed something with the Kilrathi Comm Links. There are three types of cats: a cute Hobbes looking kitten with light eyes, a lion looking cat that is neither cute nor particularly ugly, and a real ugly kitten- something that would provoke a "you're one ugly moth..." from Arnold or Danny Glover. Sometimes the same ship shows the same kitty cat on the comm, other times it has the same cat making threats and then a differen't one appearing for the death sequence. Why is that?
 
I'm not sure what you're referring to - we only have two types of Kilrathi comm videos, and they're definitely not used interchangeably. The first type is the standard helmeted Kilrathi pilot, which is used by... well, all the Kilrathi pilots. The second type is the WC2-style unhelmeted Kilrathi comm officer, which is used only by capships.

Of course, both of the above come in different versions - the comm officer has a normal and a dying video, while the helmet-wearing pilot has a normal, a combat, and a dying video. The normal and the combat videos are somewhat randomly, IIRC (in the case of taunts, at least - their use is pre-determined in the case of some other comm types, but that really only applies to their Confed counterparts), so that's probably what you're referring to. However, these are the exact same Kilrathi still. The videos themselves are taken straight from WCP (which in turn took them straight from WC3), the only difference is that we've made them green (...like they were in WC3).
 
I'm not sure I understand, so I'll try to make my first post clearer. I was referring to the helmet wearing pilots.

The helmet-wearing pilots appear to be of three different kinds - they look somewhat different from each other based on fur color or location of their features.

Let's say that X1 is flying a Sartha. I target X1 and begin to taunt the hell out of him (it's 80% mental in my opinion). X1 responds and checking in my Comm link I see X1 is a kitten with light fur and light eyes... somewhat reminiscent of Hobbes. I continue my lovely exchange of niceties with X1 until i get right behind him and rip a Dart DF into his exhaust pipe. X1 manages to scream out before he is dispatched only X1 appears to be a darker kitten with darker eyes and his features aren't the same as they first were.

I think I remember in WC3 that the faces of different types of fighters different. Either Vaktoth or Paktahn fliers were the ugly ones. Does this have something to do with it?
 
I would say it's most likely the lighting that makes them look different, but I'm not sure. It's certainly possible that there were different Kilrathi faces in WC3, though I never noticed it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top