Talk:Orion class battlestar/Archive 1 - Revision history

VARGR: /* Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook */

2012-12-12T20:00:32Z

Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:00, 12 December 2012
Line 36:		Line 36:

	::: As I said, we should certainly do that, at least. :) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:36, 11 December 2012 (EST)		::: As I said, we should certainly do that, at least. :) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:36, 11 December 2012 (EST)
			:::: B&C FB confirmed in the comments that it is deffinately a Battlestar and the Stealth Frigate designation was dropped [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 15:00, 12 December 2012 (EST)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook */ reply

2012-12-11T21:36:34Z

Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:36, 11 December 2012
Line 34:		Line 34:

	::Fair enough. It deffinately deserves a mention in the notes section of the page though on the subject of its original name being Reliant. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 16:29, 11 December 2012 (EST)		::Fair enough. It deffinately deserves a mention in the notes section of the page though on the subject of its original name being Reliant. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 16:29, 11 December 2012 (EST)

			::: As I said, we should certainly do that, at least. :) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:36, 11 December 2012 (EST)

VARGR: /* Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook */

2012-12-11T21:29:47Z

Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:29, 11 December 2012
Line 32:		Line 32:

	: Sorry, but not really. The information provided there was preliminary, and subject to change. Should we note this as its original point? Absolutely. But this was changed when it went through production. (A lot of things tend to change from script to screen.) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 15:39, 11 December 2012 (EST)		: Sorry, but not really. The information provided there was preliminary, and subject to change. Should we note this as its original point? Absolutely. But this was changed when it went through production. (A lot of things tend to change from script to screen.) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 15:39, 11 December 2012 (EST)

			::Fair enough. It deffinately deserves a mention in the notes section of the page though on the subject of its original name being Reliant. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 16:29, 11 December 2012 (EST)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook */ reply

2012-12-11T20:39:41Z

Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:39, 11 December 2012
Line 30:		Line 30:

	fb page http://www.facebook.com/bloodandchrome [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 15:24, 11 December 2012 (EST)		fb page http://www.facebook.com/bloodandchrome [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 15:24, 11 December 2012 (EST)

			: Sorry, but not really. The information provided there was preliminary, and subject to change. Should we note this as its original point? Absolutely. But this was changed when it went through production. (A lot of things tend to change from script to screen.) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 15:39, 11 December 2012 (EST)

VARGR: Actually a Stealth Frigate

2012-12-11T20:24:15Z

Actually a Stealth Frigate

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:24, 11 December 2012
Line 24:		Line 24:

	: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)		: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)

			==Called a Stealth Frigate on B&C Facebook==

			On a post on the 7th Dec A Battlestar Task Group is decribed. In it it gives information on Stealth Frigates which has this written next to it ''"(The Reliant is a stealth Frigate)"''. In the comments below it B&C FB page clearly states that the Reliant was the original name for the Orisis. Therefore this class of ship is not a battlestar, but a Stealth Frigate.

			fb page http://www.facebook.com/bloodandchrome [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 15:24, 11 December 2012 (EST)

Frylock86 at 06:37, 24 November 2012

2012-11-24T06:37:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:37, 24 November 2012
Line 19:		Line 19:
	:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]		:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

	:::: Canon sources dictate the Battlestar designation. The patch says "BSG 54". Also, according to Doug Drexler, the Valkyrie is the same ship from " Hero".		:::: Canon sources dictate the Battlestar designation. The patch says "BSG 54". Also, according to Doug Drexler, the Valkyrie is the same ship from " Hero". - [[User:frylock86\|Frylock86]]

	Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)		Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)

	: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)		: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)

Frylock86 at 21:00, 23 November 2012

2012-11-23T21:00:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:00, 23 November 2012
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]		:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

			:::: Canon sources dictate the Battlestar designation. The patch says "BSG 54". Also, according to Doug Drexler, the Valkyrie is the same ship from " Hero".

	Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)		Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)

	: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)		: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: reply

2012-11-23T18:41:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:41, 23 November 2012
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)		Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)

			: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)

VARGR at 18:39, 23 November 2012

2012-11-23T18:39:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:39, 23 November 2012
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]		:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

			Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)

Allenknott3 at 18:21, 23 November 2012

2012-11-23T18:21:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:21, 23 November 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:::Plus, looking at the Osiris arm patch, it have BSG and then two number I can't make out, which suggest that Osiris is part of Battlestar Group but don't have the same number on it hull unlike other Battlestar i.e. Galactica.		:::Plus, looking at the Osiris arm patch, it have BSG and then two number I can't make out, which suggest that Osiris is part of Battlestar Group but don't have the same number on it hull unlike other Battlestar i.e. Galactica.

	:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this.		:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

	[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:37, 24 November 2012
Line 19:		Line 19:
	:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]		:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

	:::: Canon sources dictate the Battlestar designation. The patch says "BSG 54". Also, according to Doug Drexler, the Valkyrie is the same ship from " Hero".		:::: Canon sources dictate the Battlestar designation. The patch says "BSG 54". Also, according to Doug Drexler, the Valkyrie is the same ship from " Hero". - [[User:frylock86\|Frylock86]]

	Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)		Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)

	: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)		: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:00, 23 November 2012
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]		:::I suggest that we should referred to the Osiris as a warship, and a Orion Class Warship instead of a Battlestar. Plus we have already determined that what seen on screen is subject to changed i.e. Archeron being called a Heavy Cruiser but actual being a Battlestar and the Valkyrie being the same ship from Hero, despite no on screen evidence to support this. --[[User:Allenknott3\|Allenknott3]]

			:::: Canon sources dictate the Battlestar designation. The patch says "BSG 54". Also, according to Doug Drexler, the Valkyrie is the same ship from " Hero".

	Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)		Well I'm of the opinion having seen a battlestar patch that yes it is technically a battlestar, but that in my mind there is no doubt that it is a obsolete design of battlestar from before the outbreak of war. With the war vastly larger ships were created to meet the needs of war such as the Cylons building larger basestars. This lead to the Orion Class Battlestars being obsolete and completely outdated as they were weakly armored (which is shown in how easily its external engine is destroyed), and lack a large amount of Vipers. If it turns out the class is not a pre-war design then I would say its a mistake, but since there is no evidence to show this it should remain labelled as a Battlestar. [[User:VARGR\|VARGR]] 13:39, 23 November 2012 (EST)

	: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)		: Right. There are various types of Vipers and Raptors, as well. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 13:41, 23 November 2012 (EST)