Confed Light Carrier

If you gentlemen need any help modelling any fighters etc. let me know, I'd be glad to help out. I'm currently working on a project for Killerwave but when I have the spare time I could churn out a fighter or two...
 
Except for the Eagle-class light carrier, the bow has equipment in it.
Click to expand...
What has the Eagle-class been posted..did I missed something?
I know its shown at Fleet-Tactics, but only a side view irc.
 
Well I think it will take some time till the Eagle-class will be shown since we are focusing on fighters atm.
Beside that the Eagle-class needs to be retextured and armed...so it could take a while...but I hope you like the ship...only got a rough discription of it when I designed it.
Something modern, but still common during WC3. A crossover between a flighing box and sleek ship....thats it in short without naming what it should look like ^_^
Well see Fleet Tactics for the (outdated) sideview.
 
Take into account too that when you measure the mass of a ship in space, the length and width of the ship easily account for internal hangers, which provide no mass addition to the ship at all. Differant settings on internal hangers could easily affect the mass.
 
The Eagle-class CVLs are not a fully 'canon' ship, given that the only source of their existence is a line in Fleet Action about giving one to Bondarevsky. Even the name is conjecture, and I took that line from Psych's Fleet Tactics website, since it's the only description I've ever seen.
 
The TCS Eagle was part of a class of dedicated escort carriers - ships designed from the ground up rather than converted from transports. It shows up in the WC3 novel, after failing to launch a T-Bomb strike on Kilrah. (The Eagle was Paladin's first choice, but it ran into unexpected resistance. She was crippled and transferred her Excaliburs to the Victory for another attempt. "Spyder" from WCP was one of the Eagle's Covert Ops pilots.)
 
And it was the name of Karl Bowen (if I remember the name correctly), Hawk's right-hand man from Prophecy.
 
I would guess that the Victory has a large mass to flight wing size ratio because it uses outdated, inefficient technology compared to the newer carriers. Rebuilding it from the inside out could probably rememdy this situation, but this would likely be more expensive than building a totally new ship and would simulatenously take an otherwise servicable carrier out of the fleet.
 
on the other hand, some sources I used to see confirm that Ranger had a fighter compliment of 80 fighters... But this contradicts the wc3 novell as we know it.
 
Many things in WC are contradictory to something else of WC.
Example the Kilrathi DN. Book says 22km, Video says 2.2km Novel say 22km...normal logic says 2.2km is realistic...well so you have different sources that say different things...question is what you make out of all of this infos.

But beside that it should allways be remebered that is not science...its still fiction.
 
I think he was implying that the relative lengths of the Dreadnought to (carrier?) inthe FMV from WC3 indicated about 2.2 km, or something like that?
 
Well, in every scene and mission of WC3 where the Dreadnaught appears, it is a lot smaller than 22KM, perhaps even smaller than 2.2km.

The last thing that actually annoys me in WCU is this typo that became fact. 22km is really not reasonable... and it gets less reasonable if you consider the mass of the ship, even if you try to justify that by saying it's kinda "empty". The number of turrets is also pathetic for sucha long ship. It's like you can park several Confederation CVS between each pair of turrets...

However illogical the 22km figure may be, it's become official, and neither you people will admit nor I will. So, let's live our lives and try to be friends.
 
Moonsword said:
The Eagle-class CVLs are not a fully 'canon' ship, given that the only source of their existence is a line in Fleet Action about giving one to Bondarevsky. Even the name is conjecture, and I took that line from Psych's Fleet Tactics website, since it's the only description I've ever seen.
Click to expand...

I love that site
 
Edfilho said:
Well, in every scene and mission of WC3 where the Dreadnaught appears, it is a lot smaller than 22KM, perhaps even smaller than 2.2km.

The last thing that actually annoys me in WCU is this typo that became fact. 22km is really not reasonable... and it gets less reasonable if you consider the mass of the ship, even if you try to justify that by saying it's kinda "empty". The number of turrets is also pathetic for sucha long ship. It's like you can park several Confederation CVS between each pair of turrets...

However illogical the 22km figure may be, it's become official, and neither you people will admit nor I will. So, let's live our lives and try to be friends.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm on your side...
There are so many wierd typo's in the WCU, not just techno-related. It always made me sad, since it implies to the fact that who ever was working on the WC projects each time, wasn't investing even the minimal time to conserve the continuity.

Chris roberts created a wonderful universe in WC1 and manage to keep it on par in WC2, but from there, it started going all hi-wire...

It is simply a shame. :(
 
HammerHead said:
It always made me sad, since it implies to the fact that who ever was working on the WC projects each time, wasn't investing even the minimal time to conserve the continuity.

(
Click to expand...

That is exactly the point. It is just that simple, that they don't have the
time and money (and insight of a hardcore-fan) for these things. Their job
is to make a good looking product, make big marketing and want to earn money.

Our job is to take care, that the community lives on, and not that we discuss
the few unlogical points, we cannot really solve anyway. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top