Talk:TCS Kirsk: Difference between revisions
Aeronautico (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Well, in the WC novelizations, there are several mentions of Concordias serving at the Battle of Earth, some in the process of mothballing. So, Concordias have been around for a while. They are also a spiritual successor to the Ranger carriers like the Victory, which should have been retired long ago. Yes, WC2 fails to identify the class of the Kirsk, but that's the class given in the CIC Encyclopedia. I'm working with the info the most trusted WC sites give me. I am not responsible for any of their content.[[User:Aeronautico|Aeronautico]] 23:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC) | Well, in the WC novelizations, there are several mentions of Concordias serving at the Battle of Earth, some in the process of mothballing. So, Concordias have been around for a while. They are also a spiritual successor to the Ranger carriers like the Victory, which should have been retired long ago. Yes, WC2 fails to identify the class of the Kirsk, but that's the class given in the CIC Encyclopedia. I'm working with the info the most trusted WC sites give me. I am not responsible for any of their content.[[User:Aeronautico|Aeronautico]] 23:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
The carriers mentioned in novels prior to TPoF are not given classes. The first time Concordia class is used is in TPoF. The Victory is also not a Ranger class. S*S gives us the name Yorktown Class. Ranger class are mentioned in AS and no ship name is ever given. We've long since moved away from calling the Victory a Ranger. Check out the ship class explanations in S*S as it names basically all the unnamed ship classes from WC3/4/Armada. | |||
The old Encyclopedia is not without faults. I wouldn't call the Kirsk a Concordia class simply because the old one does. These are things you need to ask about on the forums. | |||
- Dundradal | |||
Latest revision as of 14:50, 27 June 2009
Do we have confirmation that the Kirsk was a Concordia-class ship? As far as I know, no ship was prior to Wing Commander IV was ever called "Concordia-class".
Well, in the WC novelizations, there are several mentions of Concordias serving at the Battle of Earth, some in the process of mothballing. So, Concordias have been around for a while. They are also a spiritual successor to the Ranger carriers like the Victory, which should have been retired long ago. Yes, WC2 fails to identify the class of the Kirsk, but that's the class given in the CIC Encyclopedia. I'm working with the info the most trusted WC sites give me. I am not responsible for any of their content.Aeronautico 23:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The carriers mentioned in novels prior to TPoF are not given classes. The first time Concordia class is used is in TPoF. The Victory is also not a Ranger class. S*S gives us the name Yorktown Class. Ranger class are mentioned in AS and no ship name is ever given. We've long since moved away from calling the Victory a Ranger. Check out the ship class explanations in S*S as it names basically all the unnamed ship classes from WC3/4/Armada.
The old Encyclopedia is not without faults. I wouldn't call the Kirsk a Concordia class simply because the old one does. These are things you need to ask about on the forums.
- Dundradal
