Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Sci-Fi
»
Star Wars
»
The Force is strong in this one...
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by EdipisReks: [QB] [QUOTE]Matrix:Star Destroyer is just a term like battleship or Destroyer. It does not mean that the ship can destroy stars :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: .[/QUOTE]gee, thanks a fucking lot. i can see how you got your reputation, [b]Matrix[/b]. [b]Cartman[/b], don't try to use my own sources against me. [QUOTE]The colloquial term "super star destroyer"should be avoided. This is not mere pedantry; the term is actually misleading. In addition to its connection with the confusion over Executor's length, the term is also applied to some vessels which clearly belong to different classes: eg. Allegiance and Eclipse in Dark Empire, which only share little more than the distinction of being slightly or greatly bigger than one-mile destroyers. [/QUOTE]that is STRAIGHT from the entry on the Executor :p . my uncle was a commander in the navy, and i asked him if a destroyer could ever be called a command ship, regardless of its role. his answer (albeit after several beers that evening)was "Fuck no". apparently (according to him) in order for a ship to be designated a command ship it has to have certain attributes. a destoyer could lead an operation or even (it's possible) be the conveyance of an admiral, but in those cases it would be a "lead" not a "command" ship. i never said that the official designation for the executor class was "command ship", but they certainly aren't "super star destroyers". --jacob [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3