Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - Standalone => Wing Commander Saga => Topic started by: IceFire on May 25, 2008, 03:12:54 pm
-
Something that always confused me about Wing Commander 3 and 4 carriers. The Victory (WC3) and the Lexington (WC4) are infact different classes. The Victory is a Ranger class light carrier and apparently is quite old and beaten up in WC3 time. The Lexington is apparently a Concordia class carrier, lacks two laser turrets from the Ranger, and seems to be newer or at least retrofitted. Note: the TCS Concordia belongs to the Confederation class and has nothing to do with this question :)
Whats the difference? Is there anything else that I'm missing?
-
Fighter complement ;)
-
Concordia theoretically carries more? In the extra 20 meters difference in space? :)
-
Well I think the Concordia class is a little more than just a retrofitted Yorktown (official name for the old Ranger-class)
After all, Eisen mentioned he'd been communications officer on the Victory's maiden voyage. Look how old Eisen is. If we assume he's as old as the actor and he was communications officer aound the age Rollins is, (I don't know if the characters' age was ever mentioned somewhere), then the Victory had her maiden voyage over 30 years before WC3. That puts it pretty much at the beginning of the Kilrathi war. I think the novel mentioned the design itself was a pre-war design even.
So I doubt they retrofitted a 50 year old design at the time of WC4. I think the thing just happens to look about the same, but probably has a totally different internal layout.
We all know it is simply a reused model for the game, but if you want an in-universe explanation, I think after 50 years, more modern armor, more modern structural designs, smaller more effective reactors etc would make more than enough room for additional fighter complements etc.
The sources are very very problematic anyway. Read the WC4 novel. Forstchen totally missunderstood the name "Concordia class" and actually describes the Lexington to be of the same class as the TCS Concordia. Even mentions that Blair is getting the office he knew so well from his time aboard the Concordia when Angel held that office.
So you can pretty much make anything up about the Concordia class. I personally consider it a very new design for a medium fleet carrier that is bigger than the Yorktown and just happens to look similar from the outside but has a radically different internal layout.
That is... when I bother about that at all :P which usally isn't the case.
To over-discuss such things makes about as much sense as arguing Star Wars physics (a thing that is not present even according to G.L. himself ;) )
-
Oh I totally agree about over discussing such things. I'm actually re-reading the book right now...I think I may have a go at trying to make WC4 work under Vista as I kind of want to play that game (I have to admit I really liked flying the Bearcat...nobody else did :) and the story is fun) but I wanted to figure out the whole carrier class thing. See what the angles were on the subject.
In my mind I can go with, similar design, redesigned in interior, slightly larger...much newer. I can handle that.
On another note: the WC4 novel is really weird...totally breaks from the game. The two aren't even reconcilable. But whatever :) ...both are canon :D
-
I keep misreading Concordia as Cordova. So first time I saw the topic i was like, wtf. A Cordova class ?
-
Oh I totally agree about over discussing such things. I'm actually re-reading the book right now...I think I may have a go at trying to make WC4 work under Vista as I kind of want to play that game (I have to admit I really liked flying the Bearcat...nobody else did :) and the story is fun) but I wanted to figure out the whole carrier class thing. See what the angles were on the subject.
In my mind I can go with, similar design, redesigned in interior, slightly larger...much newer. I can handle that.
On another note: the WC4 novel is really weird...totally breaks from the game. The two aren't even reconcilable. But whatever :) ...both are canon :D
I personally do not consider the WC4 novel very canon. It has some interesting developments, like Blair being an alkoholic to some degree, which would make a little sense, especially when you go to WCP and see how he REALLY had problems with his past, Kilrah, Angel and all that.
But the storyline itself it dictated by the games.
In many large universes like Star Wars e.g. one bascially has to decide at one point for a hierarchy of sources. The primary source in the Star Wars Saga is always the movies. No book can override that. (The books in which Luke is searching for his mother e.g. which were contradicted by the new trilogy)
In WC the primary source has got to be the games. So I do not take anything as in-universe that happened in the novel that is contradicting the game. That means Catscratch fell in love with Sosa. Not Blair :P
Too bad they now officially made Catscratch survive WC4. I thought it would have been more dramatically correct if he had died... I wonder if he married Sosa :P
-
I haven't had a chance t read the books yet, but the general feeling I've gotten from the fan community is that defining what is canon can sometimes be a minefield. As for the movie... well I like to pretend that it was something from a different universe altogether, having nothing to do with the actual game universe.
-
I haven't had a chance t read the books yet, but the general feeling I've gotten from the fan community is that defining what is canon can sometimes be a minefield. As for the movie... well I like to pretend that it was something from a different universe altogether, having nothing to do with the actual game universe.
Hey speaking of the movie, when is the WCS team going to model those excellent Terran fightercraft? :lol:
-
To kinda quote something from the movie "You are talking about a fighter that never existed"
I know there are some people who actually like the design but I doubt that we will ever see it in Saga. Its simply to old to fit in the timeline. ^_^
-
To kinda quote something from the movie "You are talking about a fighter that never existed"
I know there are some people who actually like the design but I doubt that we will ever see it in Saga. Its simply to old to fit in the timeline. ^_^
Some people actually like the design? Who's that? Heinz Tomatoes Inc?
-
Mmmm Heinz.... :)
Yeah the WC movie is a fun movie to watch for me...largely because of the fan aspect. Its dramatic, it has awesome music, and it has cool space battles with some very decent CGI, but as far as fitting in with the WC games...just doesn't work for me. Thats ok. I can deal with that in my head. I know it makes some people explode however :)
-
Mmmm Heinz.... :)
Yeah the WC movie is a fun movie to watch for me...largely because of the fan aspect. Its dramatic, it has awesome music, and it has cool space battles with some very decent CGI, but as
Eh, yeah, except for the "they're coming out of the node one at a time and we're killing them piecemeal in a leisurely fashion". That wasn't particular cool or exciting. But the movie doesn't make my head explode, since I'm not really a WC fan in the first place (It probably would've helped if I'd played any of the games - though I played Privateer a bit).
-
I agree that I liked the movies CGI quality and music. The story wasn't that good. To much "Das Boot" in space. Its ok for a popcorn cinema but its hard to see as a WC movie. I think just keeping more of the original designs would have even improved it as a WC movie.
Still its nice to view, kinda fun. Next one will be better ^_^
-
I'm not really a WC fan in the first place
HEATHEN! BRING THE FIRE SO WE MAY PURGE THE UNCLEAN.
Sorry... I get a bit carried away sometimes.
-
I'm not really a WC fan in the first place
HEATHEN! BRING THE FIRE SO WE MAY PURGE THE UNCLEAN.
Sorry... I get a bit carried away sometimes.
Not saying it sucks I just never got into it. Played a bit of Privateer, and read End Run.
And that's about it.
-
Mmmm Heinz.... :)
Yeah the WC movie is a fun movie to watch for me...largely because of the fan aspect. Its dramatic, it has awesome music, and it has cool space battles with some very decent CGI, but as
Eh, yeah, except for the "they're coming out of the node one at a time and we're killing them piecemeal in a leisurely fashion". That wasn't particular cool or exciting. But the movie doesn't make my head explode, since I'm not really a WC fan in the first place (It probably would've helped if I'd played any of the games - though I played Privateer a bit).
Yeah but the novels and background from before the movie explain why they go through the jump point one by one. If they don't they risk jumping into each other and destroying themselves.
-
Yay, another two-year-old discussion that learned to walk again!
Note: Please don't do that.
-
Some information about the TCS Lexington can be found here: http://wingcommander.wikia.com/wiki/TCS_Lexington_%28CV-44%29. Given the fact that the ship was practically rebuilt from top to bottom with only its overall hull design left, it´s realistic to believe it carries much more fighters than the older Yorktown class. At least Blair and Eisen were quite impressed by the ship´s interior in WC4 but rather disillusioned with the outfit of the Victory in WC3, which could imply that remaining Yorktowns usually stand back leaving the ships largely as they were designed decades ago. Question is, how many fighters were Concordia-class vessels designed to carry, originally? Should we really compare an up to date and refitted Concordia-class with a totally outdated and poorly outfitted Yorktown?
-
I was always curious why you never saw more Bengal class carriers. consider. it would seem to me that it would have made sense to see some of the tigers claw's shorter sister ships.
-
the problem with seeing the Bengal class is that they were built to work independently of the main fleet so you would normally only see one if it was passing through the battle lines too or from a long range mission and I imagine rarely work with other flee elements for prolonged periods, in WC1 there was at most only 2 or 3 TC capital ships in the same area as the tigers claw at any one time.
also how many were built ? wingcommander.wikia.com lists 10 named ships with three known to be destroyed and to be honest i imagine that would be close to the number built as i imagine they would be very expensive to construct
-
You have to be careful with wingcommander.wikia.com, sometimes. They´re used to listing ships from non-canon sources like fan mods, so I wonder if all those ten Bengal carriers can be properly confirmed. I can only recall the TCS Wolfhound from the novels, though it make sense to assume that there was also a TCS Bengal to bear the name first. Just check their "Ranger-class" article. They state that Saga calls this class of ships "Yorktown", as if they had never taken a closer look at the Arena manual which corrected that popular error once and for all.
-
fare enough arrow but i think my point still stands that there would be few Bengals built and their likely deployment pattern would have made one a rare sight
-
Right. It´s still quite popular with fans... Design is a little illogical, though. Why having the most of that huge hangar deck in space?
-
Isn't there a model of a refitted Bengal somewhere that has a closed flight deck? I think I remember something like that (a fan creation I assume) and it was really cool.
-
Wcnews' WCPedia seems to be better but looks like some infos are wrong there, too.
Anyways, I thought you might want to have a look into WCPedia's stats of the Yorktown and Concordia class carriers:
http://www.wcnews.com/wcpedia/Yorktown-Class_Light_Carrier
http://www.wcnews.com/wcpedia/Concordia-Class_Fleet_Carrier
-
According to those links, the Yorktown has far superior armor and shielding.
Fore Shield: 3000 cm equivalent
Aft Shield: 3000 cm equivalent
Front Armor: 1000 cm
Right Armor: 1000 cm
Left Armor: 1000 cm
Rear Armor: 1000 cm
vs
Shields: 800 cm
Armor: 300 cm
That can't be right :p
-
According to those links, the Yorktown has far superior armor and shielding.
Fore Shield: 3000 cm equivalent
Aft Shield: 3000 cm equivalent
Front Armor: 1000 cm
Right Armor: 1000 cm
Left Armor: 1000 cm
Rear Armor: 1000 cm
vs
Shields: 800 cm
Armor: 300 cm
That can't be right :p
Faster/better shield generation? Concordia class also has double the fighter complement and presumably, double the point defence fire power (double mount lasers rather than single) so it can presumably defend itself better.
-
Any shield (re)generation rate is not taken into account in these numbers. I don´t think that Origin changed their shielding and armor system again, like they did between WC1-3, so these data just can´t be correct. Unfortunately, wcpedia doesn´t quote any sources for the Concordia-class. Are there any at all?
-
There aren't any sources for that "wiki" and they even have fan-based stuff in there in parts. So you can pretty much forget about that website.
Also don't rely on manuals. I used to extract the game values together with HCl for WC1,2 and 3 and usually they had little to do with the manual values.
-
In this case, this discussion is quite pointless. We could also assume that the Lexington is longer than just 800m, then. Even the infamous, inofficial "WCbible" states 900m, as far I can remember. Here we go again... :wtf:
-
Oh what a fun world of stats ^_^
Reminds me of the discussion why the Bengal production was stopped if it had more firepower then entire fleets. Espacialy the movie version was "ovepowered" according to the manual.
22 AA-turrets, 8 Laser turrets and ass kicking 40 torpedo tubes!
Even when you look at the manual you can see about 17 turrets on the Bengal. That is still quite impressive.
Indeed its pretty hard to tell what to take as given and what is just fantasy.
-
Espacialy the movie version was "ovepowered" according to the manual.
Which manual? For the movie? Maybe that could give some answers as to why confed´s fleet seemed only to consist of one big armada (too far away, of course) and one single carrier... Given that mighty battle-carrier, who needs another fleet, anyway? :lol:
-
The movie manual indeed. I don't have it, just screenshots out of it with stats to the Confederation-class and Bengal-class.
-
Any shield (re)generation rate is not taken into account in these numbers. I don´t think that Origin changed their shielding and armor system again, like they did between WC1-3, so these data just can´t be correct. Unfortunately, wcpedia doesn´t quote any sources for the Concordia-class. Are there any at all?
The source for the Concordia-class shield and armor info comes from Origin's Official Guide To Wing Commander IV (ISBN: 0-929373-37-5). It list for carriers a shield strength of 800 with the armor as 300 both as the maximum per quadrant Fore/Aft/Port/Starboard and the body of the ship as 6000 with a shield regeneration rate of 800 points per second for the entire grid.
-
well I have to say I agree with some of the statements about the Bengal class i disagree with others
according to claw marks http://download.wcnews.com/files/manuals/Wing%20Commander%20-%20Claw%20Marks.pdf page 47 in the pdf
"
Pride of the Fleet
The TCS Tiger's Claw
2642: The Confederation military command, determining that a need exists for a heavy space carrier,
authorizes design of the Bengal-class carrier line. Trojan Four Spaceyards wins the assignment to build the
new line of carriers.
2644: The newly-launched TCS Tiger's Claw, on its shakedown cruise, carrying a minimal spacecrew and
an under-experienced command, finds itself in the path of a surprise Kilrathi invasion force. The ship's
unexpected presence along the Kilrathi flight plan, clever tactics on the part of the command crew, and
performance above and beyond the call of duty by the spacecrews rout the superior Kilrathi force. Shortly
thereafter, Tiger's Claw is given permanent assignment in Vega Sector.
2645: The second Bengal-class space carrier, the Kipling, is launched. Owing to design modifications, the
Kipling and all subsequent Bengals are 10 meters shorter and several tonnes less massive than the Tiger's
Claw, making the Tiger's Claw the biggest space carrier in its class.
2649: Tiger's Claw performs a delaying action to allow Confederation transports carrying ground troops to
retreat out of Kilrathi-occupied space. The engagement, known as Custer's Carnival, concludes with Tiger's
Claw seriously damaged but able to return to port. The carrier is in spacedock undergoing repairs and
refitting until early '50.
"
The Tigers Claw was the first and its the biggest the second was the Kipling.
note I haven't seen any revised images with a covered flight deck however since there were "design modifications" in the ships launched after the Tigers Claw so it may be possible.
The Bengal class was meant for deep strike missions however due to the number of transports required to resupply it they would need at least return to the front line during resupply after major campaigns.
Also I could see it being used in pincer maneuvers. A Bengal class carrier sneaks around the rear of the Kilrathi fleet to cut off supply lines and the escape route for the Kilrathi capital ships. while the main confederation fleet made a major push forward on the other side of the Kilrathi fleet slowly taking it out by attrition.
-
Isn't there a model of a refitted Bengal somewhere that has a closed flight deck? I think I remember something like that (a fan creation I assume) and it was really cool.
Is this the one you were talking about?
http://www.wcnews.com/wcpedia/Image:Wcatv-bengal.png
Its from the wing commander academy TV series
-
Right. It´s still quite popular with fans... Design is a little illogical, though. Why having the most of that huge hangar deck in space?
well I have a thought on this
If you remember the first game the Bengal class utilizes launch tubes that catapult fighters when launching, so the actual fighter flight deck is probably on the interior of the ship. The deck that you see is just for landing and possibly used for launching for larger ships such as shuttles. since you could only land on the ship from the front is makes sense to have an open landing deck in case of an emergency wave off (order to abort a landing in progress), that could be caused by an accident involving an other landing fighter or the need to make an emergence course change.
This kind of design would have several advantages primarily it would make it impossible for an enemy fighter to strafe the flight deck and destroy fighters before they are launched. This is a tactic I used in wc3 against an enemy carrier that actually seemed to work in preventing a second wave of fighters from being launched. I got the idea from watching a something on TV about WWII it seems that that was a preferred and quite common way for fighters to attack a carrier. In real life this tactic also would prevented the launch of the remaining fighters that were still working until they cleared the wreckage from the deck
In addition the launch tubes would allow for a more rapid deployment of fighters in an emergency because it would allow simultaneous launch of multiple fighters at once without concern for accidental collisions on the flight deck. The only limiting factor in the launch speed would be the number of tubes and their reset and reload time. Also launch tubes would reduce the likely hood of utilizing a missiles on a launching fighters before they can respond, incidentally I've found this to be a useful tactic in WC Saga because the enemy fighters tend to be in close proximity during there launch as a result there is usually collateral damage done to the other fighters from the missile explosion.