Now don't go postal with this

Err, no, the Handbook doesn't give a date for the Tiger's Claw -- 2619 is the *first* of the Bengal class. The novel gives the proper launch date for Tiger's CLaw... right out of Claw Marks (literally -- Blair reads it from Claw Marks in the book:)).

Some more support for the single Iason theory...

- According to the Handbook, Iason was commissioned in 2613 (long before the first encounter with the Kilrathi), and *refitted* in 2633! A few scant years after the first incident -- quelle coincidence!

- The Captain is called "Jedora Andropolos" only in the little box with specs/info about the ship. She's referred to as just Captain Andropolos everywhere else... and she's a *woman* -- whereas Jedora Andropolos circa 2629 was a man <G> The point being that it's quite possible that it's simply another person named Andropolos -- since it can't be the *same* person, and since the 'facts' box may refer to the *original* captain.
 
Originally posted by Raptor
Originally posted by mpanty
IIRC, Admiral Thrawn. Colonel Halcyon was the Wing Commander...
Thrawn is dead. He died a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. :D
Whooops! Did I mix universes here? :D

LOAF, who was in command of the Tiger's Claw during WC1?
 
That was Captain Thorn IIRC. At least he's the Captain during FF, though I remember that Tolwyn also commanded the Tiger's Claw for some time as well as Halcyon (SM1, I think).
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF

Some more support for the single Iason theory...

- According to the Handbook, Iason was commissioned in 2613 (long before the first encounter with the Kilrathi), and *refitted* in 2633! A few scant years after the first incident -- quelle coincidence!

- The Captain is called "Jedora Andropolos" only in the little box with specs/info about the ship. She's referred to as just Captain Andropolos everywhere else... and she's a *woman* -- whereas Jedora Andropolos circa 2629 was a man <G> The point being that it's quite possible that it's simply another person named Andropolos -- since it can't be the *same* person, and since the 'facts' box may refer to the *original* captain.

I suppose. It's still rather sloppy. I'm going to work on finding stuff against this, however. You've not won yet.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
(Which is to say, this thread was nice and pleasant until you started being stupid. Say it with me now... DON'T BE STUPID!)

I wasn't being stupid. This is a chat zone. I was discussing and arguing MY point. There can no discussion if everyone agrees now can there?

If you start branding people 'stupid' for bringing their points across and state their points as void, whats the point of CZ?

Now with regards to there being no second Iason, but it actually being a refit of the first. That is more credible than two 'separate' Iasons.
 
I wasn't being stupid. This is a chat zone. I was discussing and arguing MY point. There can no discussion if everyone agrees now can there?

I notice you didn't quote yourself -- perhaps there's a recognizable difference between putting across a point and saying, oh, "To all those that subscribe to this idea, that I must say that if you can expect the reasonable man to believe that trash, its insulting to my intelligence." I'll let Frosty drive this point home, since it's what he does best.

Re: Command
There have been several Tiger's Claw captains... in the movie, it was Captain Sansky, who killed himself towards the end. He was replaced by the chain of command, but not officially as Captain, by his XO, Commander Gerald. Gerald was, in turn, replaced by Captain Thorn after Pilgrim Stars when Confed saw fit to assign an actual replacement for Sansky. Towards the end of WC1 Thorn was accused of cowardice by Tolwyn (WC3 novel) and relieved of command. Tolwyn took over command until Operation Thor's Hammer, when Colonel Halcyon was made commander of the ship. Thorn, aquitted, returned to command the ship at Firekka (and until its destruction).
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
I notice you didn't quote yourself -- perhaps there's a recognizable difference between putting across a point and saying, oh, "To all those that subscribe to this idea, that I must say that if you can expect the reasonable man to believe that trash, its insulting to my intelligence." I'll let Frosty drive this point home, since it's what he does best.

Perhaps you are missing the point. My thoughts will not be dictated to me as if I was a child. By saying that there were two, whilst dismissing my opinion as my own, I thought insulting to my intelligence. The thing is, we all have our own opinions, and if one were to dictate others as being THE RIGHT way of doing things, there is no point in a chatzone. We should argue our points, not dictate rules regarding 'contested' WC events.


Shall we just agree to disagree?
 
Originally posted by redwolf
Perhaps you are missing the point. My thoughts will not be dictated to me as if I was a child. By saying that there were two, whilst dismissing my opinion as my own, I thought insulting to my intelligence.
Quit using "whilst" to make yourself seem smarter, because it actually makes you seem stupid and arrogant. The fact is, that word was never intended for use as a replacement for “while,” which is the word you should’ve placed there. That you don't recognize this leads me to believe that you're an intellectual poseur.

Of course that's not the only thing leading me to that conclusion...
To all those that subscribe to this idea, that I must say that if you can expect the reasonable man to believe that trash, its insulting to my intelligence.
I must say; your vaunted intelligence must be easily offended.

"By saying that there were two, whilst dismissing my opinion as my own, I thought insulting to my intelligence," is a statement that I have difficulty deciphering because I my school never offered foreign language courses in gibberish. However, it was plain to see that you were trying to weasel out of what you said earlier.

You claimed that any idea that contested your own was "trash," and claimed that it was "insulting to [your] intelligence," that we could ever dream of trying to convince you of the opposite. Allow me to repeat LOAF's previous statement when I say that's being stupid.

For once, maybe you should try and listen to what other people say. It might just turn out that they make more sense than you originally thought.




[Edited by Frosty on 07-15-2001 at 07:29]
 
Perhaps you are missing the point. My thoughts will not be dictated to me as if I was a child. By saying that there were two, whilst dismissing my opinion as my own, I thought insulting to my intelligence. The thing is, we all have our own opinions, and if one were to dictate others as being THE RIGHT way of doing things, there is no point in a chatzone. We should argue our points, not dictate rules regarding 'contested' WC events.


Shall we just agree to disagree?
[/B]

Since you are clearly very stupid, let me explain once more in *even* simpler words: DO NOT INSULT PEOPLE, IT IS BAD. Having differing opinions doesn't mean you can insult people.

Now, you are welcome to argue your points -- but you are *not* welcome to insult people and rant about how horrible it is that we don't think you're special. If you do either of those things in a follow up, I will ban you and close the thread. Lets have a nice civilized discussion.
 
From what LOAF last wrote it seems even more that I sure as hell didn't know what I'd unleash with this thread, but as the Man just said keep it civil.

Once more to the Claw issue and the different ship 'styles' is it possible the WCM one was refitted after its engagement with the Kilrathi forces in Vega and then got a new design with the refit?
 
It really isn't possible that the ship was refitted for it's different looks... since WC1 starts very very shortly after the movie... and some WCA takes place during WC1... and most of SWC takes place with the exact same missions as WC1...

TC
 
I think it's possible in the case of the movie... since the carrier *was* crippled during the course of the film, it may have had significant repairs/upgrades afterwards (since the movie takes place before WC1/SWC/WCA with the exception of the first episode of WCA... and that doesn't have Tiger's Claw in it).
 
So basically what you're saying is that the movie Tiger's Claw was damaged during the (movie) story, and then refitted to the shape we see from WC1 onwards...

Mmmmhhh... time-wise it could be possible, but I don't think that it's feasible shape-wise: just look at the difference in shape of the two versions!!!

Do we have any stats regarding their actual length? I'd be ready to bet the movie Claw was significantly longer than its WC1 pal...
 
Back
Top