Would you like a CapShip with that?

ladies and gentlemen. i wish to present to you, the designer of the midway2 class carrier. tim "the toolman" taylor :D
 
Originally posted by Napoleon
Just to remind you but the Ranger Class Light carriers are older than the Bengals by at least 20 years.
Click to expand...
That bolsters my point, not retract from it. ;) All the more reason for there not to be any more Rangers in service.
 
No, Rangers have kicked the bucket. :) Really, what's so good about them? People liking the Victory I can understand, but Rangers in general?
 
I wonder how much a Ranger would cost nowadays? :)

I like the Ranger...like the Scimm, it's a relic of an earlier time, back at the very beginning of the war...
 
What good is nostalgia and 'classic' design when the enemy whips your butt with superior technology? ;) I suppose the only advantage old equipment might have is surprise - if an enemy is expecting relatively weak resistance from obsolete ships, they might relax their guard... wait this war is between Terrans and Nephilim, isn't it? Too bad.
 
I din't mean I like the Ranger IN SERVICE, laddie! :) I meant it in the same way I like the USS Constution - fine ship, but not exactly in active service. ;)

Give me a couple of Vesuviuses to fight the Bugs anyway. And I want my flagship named the Concordia. ^_^
 
Ranger in service, Ranger not in service, what difference does it make? You'll still get your butt whipped.

Oh, yeah, why not just add another Concordia into the mix.
 
Okay. I mean I like my Rangers as MUSEUM ships. Like the Victory. Get it? Sorry..."All your Ranger are belong to us".
(Sorry Zor, just HAD to do that! ;)
 
Never did like the Victory... which is rather appropriate, considering Blair didn't seem to either :).

(Oddly enough though, I kinda liked the Lexington... even though it's almost identical)
 
Blair didnt like it at first but as time went on he really warmed up to it and even thought of it as home.

Though i could see liking the Lexington more. The Victory was about 40 years old and the Lexington was about 5. One was just a bit nicer:)
 
Does anyone but me find it a bit ODD that a 720m carrier is considered a LIGHT carrier, in prewar time?

Considering the Claw was only 700m, and looking a the silhouettes carried something like half the volume...

Also in Claw Marks:

"The Confederation military command, determining that a need exists for a heavy space carrier, authorizes design of the Bengal-class carrier line. Trojan Four Spaceyards wins the assignment to build the new line of carriers."

So: Bengal, commissioned in 2642, is 700m long and visibly smaller than Ranger. Yet Bengal is a HEAVY carrier, and Ranger is a LIGHT carrier ?!
 
Rangers were retired...

As for designations (heavy versus light versus whatever) -- look at the masses, the number of fighters and the weapons for that determination... *not* the length. They could make a thousand meter long strip of metal, but it would *not* be a heavy carrier. :)
 
Originally posted by Bob McDob
I wonder how much a Ranger would cost nowadays? :)

I like the Ranger...like the Scimm, it's a relic of an earlier time, back at the very beginning of the war...
Click to expand...

I hate scimitars with a passion. I will do anything to end.. wait... they arent around anymore arent they.. whooops my bad.

The ranger just looks really cool :) But I still think it could kick a few hairballs around some more (or bugs now) as long as it has a decent excort (no you dont need a whole fleet, just two/three destroyers lol) It can handle its own, like it did in WC3, tin can sally showed us its NOT the the age of the ship, its the people who command and fly that make the difference

sides, 2 striaght very popular carriers tend to get boring, why not give the oldest (i know its not the OLDEST but bear with me) bucket of bolts for once?? Look now, the midway, guhhh lol... i dont know if the cerberus is that much of a popular ship. but anyways, nuf of my ranting

[Edited by RATM on 05-17-2001 at 08:32]
 
The problem I have with the Scimitar is that IRL it would spin around indefinitely pitching downward since the engines are mounted so far off the centre of gravity... But IMO it isn't bad, it has the best cockpit by far and once You psychologically get over it, it's quite nice... But then again, I never liked the Rapier at all...

The Rangers in WC3 had textures so much better than the lousy grey panel texture of WCIV, I wonder why they didn't keep that blue and yellow...
 
Yeah, I get it... But there's no need for such blatant disregard to reality... I'm a theoretical physicist and it takes away from my enjoyment of the game to look at the Scimm... Although in WC1 You never see anything anyway... Until I saw Claw Marks I always thought those were missiles *lol*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top