TCS Agincourt

Penguin

Spaceman
As of this moment the card displayed on the main page shows the TCS Agincourt. It looks like the TCS Ajax. I thought the Agincourt was a Waterloo class cruiser from WC2 or is this a different ship?

------------------
So I told them straight - we'll decide how to spend our defence budget, not them!
How did our allies take that?
What allies?
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
It is possible for a name to be used more than once. How many Concordias do we have in WC, after all?
smile.gif


Presumably during the war the original Agincourt was destroyed (it's a war, ships die in wars) or scrapped, as you'll never, AFAIK, see 2 ships bearing the same name at the same time.

------------------
SubCrid Death
Official Net.Nazi, LOAF's Merry Guild



[This message has been edited by Death (edited January 18, 2000).]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Though why they would show something like the Ajax on the card, when the Waterloo class ships looked so darned great is beyond me...
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
They probably used the picture of a Tallahasse-class (see the novel "False Colors") cruiser because it was, oh, I dunno... released after WC3, at which point the Waterloo-class cruiser was most likely already destroyed?
smile.gif


Besides, there's the practical matter of recognizability. How many here, were they not WC junkies, would recognize a Waterloo-class cruiser shortly after the release of WC3, which for more than a few people was their first taste of WC?

------------------
SubCrid Death
Official Net.Nazi, LOAF's Merry Guild
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Death's Head

Spaceman
It sounds like it would be cheaper to build two more effective ships (the Tallahassee and Ranger) rather than a compromise ship, the Waterloo, which is relatively easy to destroy.
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
The Ranger-class is actually an ancient design, dating back towards the beginning of the war.
wink.gif


As for the non-nitpick stuff, If you'll look at the 2 cruiser designs, given the dire straits Confed was in by the time of WC3 (after Battle of Terra), it's faster to produce Tallahasses, which are modular ships, than it is Waterloos, which obviously aren't.

(That's the universe explanation; for a technical explanation, the curves of the Waterloo-class would be a cast-iron b*tch to code into the WC3/4 game engine, which doesn't really support lots of curves on the models very well.)

Of course, I think the Waterloo-class looks more cool, but that's just me.
smile.gif


------------------
SubCrid Death
Official Net.Nazi, LOAF's Merry Guild
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
Death: Unless you meant to say the opposite of what you said, we all seem to agree with you. The Waterloo sure was much cooler looking. But, like you said. The WC 3 engine would have failed utterly with the Waterloo. Come to think of it, even the WCP engine would struggle a bit over it.
 

Earthworm

Spaceman
Wouldn't help much, the whole thing was round in every place. The Waterloo did look cool though. One of the best looking ships in WC.

------------------
Uh excuse me Mr.Cat, sir, but would you mind like ceasing fire for a little while so we can barbecue your god-ugly asses? Todd "Maniac" Marshall Wing Commander Pilgrim Stars
 

Earthworm

Spaceman
It won't look cool anymore
frown.gif


------------------
Uh excuse me Mr.Cat, sir, but would you mind like ceasing fire for a little while so we can barbecue your god-ugly asses? Todd "Maniac" Marshall Wing Commander Pilgrim Stars
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
I seem to recall that the explanation from Origin's publications people (back when they explained such things at the Origin CZ
smile.gif
) was that they were different Agincourts.

------------------
Long live the Confederation,
Ben "Bandit" Lesnick
(loaf@wcnews.com - 302228)

The Wing Commander CIC
http://www.wcnews.com

"You go, LOAF! Get some!" -JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top