Editing Talk:Night Flight/Archive 1
Discussion page of Night Flight/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:::Well, it ''is'' a battlestar, so it has to have a basic battery, Vipers and Raptors, right? Wouldn't be much of one without them. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 20:47, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | :::Well, it ''is'' a battlestar, so it has to have a basic battery, Vipers and Raptors, right? Wouldn't be much of one without them. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 20:47, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
::::I suppose to a certain extent, but it can be dangerous to make assumptions based only on what we've seen. For example, in the Star Trek universe I would have assumed that all warp-driven ships would need two nacelles, but I'd have been [[MemoryAlpha:Hermes class|wrong]]. I wouldn't want to necessarily rule out the possibility of a battlestar that could only launch Vipers (and not Raptors), or one without significant batteries (smaller, faster, more dependent on other ships for firepower), or other kinds of specialized ships that were formed more around being fielded as part of a larger fleet rather than on their own. I suppose if we could get some sort citation documenting the minimum standard specs of all battlestars, we could probably safely assume at least those, but I wasn't sure that we had such a spec. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 21:09, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ::::I suppose to a certain extent, but it can be dangerous to make assumptions based only on what we've seen. For example, in the Star Trek universe I would have assumed that all warp-driven ships would need two nacelles, but I'd have been [[MemoryAlpha:Hermes class|wrong]]. I wouldn't want to necessarily rule out the possibility of a battlestar that could only launch Vipers (and not Raptors), or one without significant batteries (smaller, faster, more dependent on other ships for firepower), or other kinds of specialized ships that were formed more around being fielded as part of a larger fleet rather than on their own. I suppose if we could get some sort citation documenting the minimum standard specs of all battlestars, we could probably safely assume at least those, but I wasn't sure that we had such a spec. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 21:09, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
:My educated guess for the covered battlestar name would be ''Oedipus'', but of course we can't be sure. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 06:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | :My educated guess for the covered battlestar name would be ''Oedipus'', but of course we can't be sure. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 06:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
::SV created a Sciffy thread to aid us. One writer put reverse-video caps that clearly defined the last four letters: "smus". Given that the first letter is a straight back, and I can't think of any other germanic words or names that could use those four letters, I'm more confident that "Erasmus" is the name behind the shell. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 10:25, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | ::SV created a Sciffy thread to aid us. One writer put reverse-video caps that clearly defined the last four letters: "smus". Given that the first letter is a straight back, and I can't think of any other germanic words or names that could use those four letters, I'm more confident that "Erasmus" is the name behind the shell. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 10:25, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | ||