Bandit LOAF said:
None of this is logic because it is ENTIRELY BASED ON YOUR OWN, ALREADY DISPROVEN ASSUMPTIONS.
Actually, in your ships listing, you actually listed the TCS-Gettysburg as a Waterloo-Class cruiser yourself.
Lets break it down (I know, I should just give up on anything this pointless - but I have a pretty boring day ahead of me regardless).
Here here, I have the same problem on my hands.
Point One:
We have already pointed out four things which you must take into account here.
#1 - We encounter more than sixty Gettysburg fighters over the course of Special Operations 1. It is therefore impossible that it is configured as a normal cruiser which carries only forty fighters. Note that I say *we encounter* not *it has*. "60+" is, and please follow me hear, NOT THE SHIPS COMPLIMENT. IT IS THE NUMBER OF FIGHTERS BLAIR PERSONALLY ENCOUNTERS.
That's why I said 80... it would be very odd for it to carry more... remember, the Confed-Class which is a dreadnought carries 120... that seems to be the most. Since the Waterloo-Class is significantly smaller, it would be highly unlikely that it would carry more.
So, I guess we could put an upper limit on 120
#2 - The assertation that Tolwyn would "correct" Blair is wrong as Tolwyn *repeatedly* (both before and after this occurs) misleads Blair regarding the nature of the Gettysburgs situation and even the makeup of its fighter complement.
Doesn't Blair actually land *ON* the Gettysburg?
#3 - Carriers, are by their very nature, a type of cruiser. The 'C' in 'CV' stands for Cruiser.
Yes, but the modern, and the Wing Commander definition of Cruiser is far different from a Carrier...
1.) Cruisers are far more offensive in their armament than Carriers, which are more defensive
2.) Cruisers often carry torpedoes. At least numerous referrences point to this. Carriers rarely do. The only exception I've seen so far is 1.) the Bengal-Class (Actually the Ranger carries Capship Missiles... I don't know if that counts also)
3.) Many WC Carriers do not have AMG's like their Cruiser Counterparts do.
#4 - We have *REPEATEDLY* seen 'switchable' ships referred to as their original class rather than what they are clearly configured as. The Ras Nik'hra is *almost always* called a cruiser, despite the fact that it is the fighter-launching light carrier variant of the Fralthi.
I just thought you mentioned that it was almost always referred to as a Carrier? And there was only like one case where it was referred to otherwise...
Part Two:
This is inane because WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE GETTYSBURGS FIGHTER COMPLEMENT MIGHT BE. The only thing we know is that it is *GREATER THAN SIXTY*. >60 is NOT A LICENSE TO DECIDE YOUR OWN FIGHTER COUNT FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT. There's no possible way you can say "Greater than sixty, eh? It must have 61 fighters, therefore I'm right!". It could, for all we know, carry 150 fighters.
Unlikely... the Confederation was to my knowledge, considered to have the highest fighter-compliment of any Confed Carrier (even though it was considered to be a Dreadnought)
I basically assumed 40 is normal for most Waterloo's, 120 is Concordia, and Blair encountered 60, meaning there were a couple more left... I just made a guess.
For the purposes of a fanfic, I would need to make an exact number. I could use your advice on this part. While it's not canon, we don't *HAVE* an exact number, so estimates must be made.
Part Three:
Again, we have a situation where you are arguing the situation BASED ON SOMETHING YOU MADE UP. Even ignoring the fact that we do not know the upper bound for the Gettysburgs fighter complement, there is also no indication ANYWHERE IN THE WING COMMANDER CANON that there is a 'set' number of fighters onboard a fleet carrier. You can't make up a fighter complement and then make up a *requirement* for a fighter complement and call it anything but a crazy delusion.
I'm just saying that most of the larger carriers in WC carried more than 60 or even 80-carriers... that's all.
Now, for my commentary, we know that the Gettysburg has *more* than sixty fighters... and we know that sixty is higher than the complement of *any* plain cruiser, light or escort carrier. Now do the math using real facts...
The Waterloo to *begin* with has more fighters than most cruisers or even one carrier-class to begin with (Ranger).
Then you should travel back in time to 1991 and have a chat with the woman who wrote SO1. Failing the ability to do that, this is simply a silly, pointless idea. What's the *point*? No one will have any respect at all for such a 'correction' - it'll only serve to piss off anyone who's read End Run (the people who, presumably, are the audience for such a fanfic...).
I don't have that ability. If I did, I'd have better things to do that tell a person to make their game different. I'd be doing things like telling the version of me in the past to not spread rumors about this girl to ruin her reputation, which backfired on me and repulsed a guy that liked me, which delayed by de-virginification by 3 years.
I believe the named Bengals are: Beacontree, Bengal, Eagle's Talon, Exeter, Kipling, Kyoto, Trafalgar and Wolfhound. I'm sure you can double-check this with the ships list, readily available in the CIC's articles checklist.
*Checks the list*
TCS-Bengal
TCS-Tigers Claw (DESTROYED)
TCS-Rudyard Kipling
TCS-Beacontree
TCS-Eagle's Talon
TCS-Exeter
TCS-Kyoto
TCS-Trafalgar (DESTROYED)
TCS-Wolfhound
Okay, I know two were destroyed... were any others destroyed (just out of curiousity?
-Concordia