gamefreak Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Why do you have to argue? There are God knows how many plot holes and overlaps between the books, EU and the films that contradict each other.. The complete truth just isn't there... Just contradictory sources. I think I just found the smartest person in this forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Because we argue for the fun of it? Ugh, this is where my post back at Dexter's takes all of its meaning... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted November 10, 2005 Share Posted November 10, 2005 Why do you have to argue? There are God knows how many plot holes and overlaps between the books, EU and the films that contradict each other.. The complete truth just isn't there... Just contradictory sources. It's not as much arguing as much as debating their conflicting opinions. It's all in good fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 Eagle - Germany, the UK and France have never used F-16's. Instead, with the exception of Germany because of the whole 'we tried to conquer Europe' thing, the more powerful nations in the world build their own equipment. For example, in World War 2 you had UK - Spitfire - Hurricane - Typhoon - Tempest - Lancaster - Matilda I and II - Churchill CCCP - MiG-1 and 3 - T-34 - KV-1 - IS-1 and 2 Germany - Fw190 - Bf109 - PzKpfw III and IV - Panther - Tiger - King/Royal Tiger US - P-51 - P-47 - P-38 - B-17 - B-24 - B-29 - M-4 - M-3 and so on and so forth. Even Sweden had their own specially designed equipment before WW2. Since Star Wars combat is based on WW2, this is particually relevant. In the modern world, you still see the same thing, but to a lesser extent due to globalisation. As for the Offical site talking about the 'Alderaan Cruiser'. You need Hyperspace access for the second two but go to- Tantive Touchdown KV39 Alderaan Cruiser Conference Room Inside the Alderaan Cruiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 You don't know much about WWII. The Germans did use equipment from other nations, the Panzer 38(t) which is Czech in origin. Russia deployed many british tanks. Britain used the M-4 Sherman and B-17. All of them had their own vehicles but that doesn't mean they didn't acquire some from other nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 lol Luke, well I guess all that time doing a History major at Univeristy, specialising in World War II has been wasted then hey? Sure, the British and Soviets used US equipment, as did the Germans funnily enough. In fact, the US Browning 9mm Hi-Power was used by the German SS during the war. Thing is though, the majority of equipment used by each nation was unique to that nation. In many cases, equipment that came from another country was altered to suit the new owners. An example of this is the Sherman Firefly. Sure, the British used the M-4, but it was modified and even Soviet M-4's were different to those dployed by the US. Besides, I said that nations built their own equipment, not that they only used they own equipment. Interstingly, I noticed you failed to comment on my evidence from the Official site. Seen the light yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxDude Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 So it calls that an Alderrain Cruiser...it also calls it a Blockade Runner. The point is, the TEGTVAV is the correct source because everyone accepts it and is the source that is the widest in use. It is a Corellian Corvette. That is in Rebellion, the X/W Series Games and the books. Therefore, the website is outnumbered. Also, that is in reference to its use by Senator Organa and only in Episode III. Not the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 From what I've heard, Nubian is actually from another source than Naboo. http://www.theforce.net/swenc/entrydesc.asp?search=42172 They cite sources like The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels to say that it is actually from the planet Nubia which apparently has an exotic shipyard coporation. I honestly don't know why everybody assumed that because Naboo had exotic fighters and ships that they were made there anyways. TIE fighters weren't made on Coruscant, neither were star destroyers, even though they were shown on Coruscant's surface. Just because the fighters and ship reflect the culture, doesn't mean that they are necessarily from that culture. I know I don't make the clothes I wear, but they are an outward expression of me and my opinions and sense of culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 lol Luke, well I guess all that time doing a History major at Univeristy, specialising in World War II has been wasted then hey? Yes. Thing is though, the majority of equipment used by each nation was unique to that nation. In many cases, equipment that came from another country was altered to suit the new owners. An example of this is the Sherman Firefly. Sure, the British used the M-4, but it was modified and even Soviet M-4's were different to those dployed by the US. I know that. Besides, I said that nations built their own equipment, not that they only used they own equipment. And that also applies to Alderaan. They can use other planet's equipment too you know. Interstingly, I noticed you failed to comment on my evidence from the Official site. Seen the light yet? Very well, it could mean anything. My interpretation is that it's called an Alderaanian Cruiser simply because it's used by Alderaan. It does not indicate the people who built it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 Alderaan Cruiser...I'm thinking Luke's right on that one. Refering to it's owners in that sense, just as when the rebels owned it, it was refered to as the "Rebel Blockade Runner." It doesn't say that Alderaanian's built it, on the contrary, the database shows it as designed by corellian engineering corp as mentioned already and highlights it as the vehicle used in episode III. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxDude Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 But it was built by CEC...therefore it is a Corellian Corvette. TIE variants were built by Sienar...and thus called Sienar Fleet Systems Imperial TIE [insert variant here]. Star Destroyers are called Kuat Drive Yards Imperial Star Destroyers. The Falcon is made by CEC as well. A CEC YT - 1300. It's still a Corellian Freighter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 The Falcon is made by CEC as well. A CEC YT - 1300. It's still a Corellian Freighter. Well of course it was called a corellian frieghter, it was owned by a corellian. ;-) j/k, sorry, couldn't resist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logain Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Imperators are just called Imperators, not KDY Imperators, more than one company constructs them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 So it calls that an Alderrain Cruiser...it also calls it a Blockade Runner. The point is, the TEGTVAV is the correct source because everyone accepts it and is the source that is the widest in use. Not true, I don't accept it, ergo your statement is incorrect. Very well, it could mean anything. My interpretation is that it's called an Alderaanian Cruiser simply because it's used by Alderaan. So an Imperial Star Destroyer is called that because the Imperials use it, not because they built it? I suppose that means the Super Star Destroyer is used by an organisation called 'Super' then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Gaarni Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 No, it's called Super cause it's massive and, well, super in size. It's still an Imperial Super Star Destroyer ... well, those controlled by the Empire that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Not true, I don't accept it, ergo your statement is incorrect. He obviously means the majority of people accept it as a source. The statement isn't so well formulated but you do know what it means nonetheless. It still doesn't make his argument that TEGTVAV is the most widely used source to have any lesser impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxDude Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Imperators are just called Imperators, not KDY Imperators, more than one company constructs them Of course more than one company constructs them, however the main construction company is KDY. TNEGTVAV calls them that. What I ment by that comment is that most of the people not like us (that can't ID an ISDII from an ISD) use TNEGTVAV. Besdies http://www.starwars.com, what other source do you know of that provides the correct information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthfergie Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 Of course more than one company constructs them, however the main construction company is KDY. TNEGTVAV calls them that. What I ment by that comment is that most of the people not like us (that can't ID an ISDII from an ISD) use TNEGTVAV. Besdies http://www.starwars.com, what other source do you know of that provides the correct information? Correct information according to windu? or the correct information according to everything that's been gathered? My favorite source is TFN's Encyclopedia, but that is of course the pagan's handbook of EU so I wouldn't suggest it when arguing with Windu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 The only sources of info I use are the films, and if I need or want to know something more I go to the offical site Databank. Never even seen the TFN Encyclopedia, or the TNEGTVAV, whatever that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 and if I need or want to know something more I go to the offical site Databank. Which states that CEC made the Corellian Corvette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 Correct. However, other sources on the offical site which directly relate to RotS clearly state that it is the Alderaan Cruiser. Ergo, that is the better source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 Correct. However, other sources on the offical site which directly relate to RotS clearly state that it is the Alderaan Cruiser. Ergo, that is the better source. How do you know it's the better source? It's more an opinion then an actual fact. Hell, it's one line under a picture... Besides, I've already said how it could mean a cruiser used by Alderaan and you haven't been able to say about that possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxDude Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 The only sources of info I use are the films, and if I need or want to know something more I go to the offical site Databank. Never even seen the TFN Encyclopedia, or the TNEGTVAV, whatever that is. TNEGTVAV stands for The New Essential Guide to Vheicles and Vessels. If you were paying attention to earlier posts (and not trying to argue every point) you would have seen me spell it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 14, 2005 Share Posted November 14, 2005 luke - no, it's one picture for RotS and two video's for RotS. As I said, since those directly relate to RotS whereas the Databank details do not, the previous sources are better. In addition, while making RotS they could have gone along with EU and called it the Corellian Corvette, but they didn't. Why? Because it's not a Corellian Corvette, it's an Alderaan Cruiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 14, 2005 Share Posted November 14, 2005 luke - no, it's one picture for RotS and two video's for RotS. As I said, since those directly relate to RotS whereas the Databank details do not, the previous sources are better. In addition, while making RotS they could have gone along with EU and called it the Corellian Corvette, but they didn't. Why? Because it's not a Corellian Corvette, it's an Alderaan Cruiser. Last I heard, the name "Alderaanian Cruiser" isn't mentionned in the movie. Again, you haven't replied to how it couldn't just be called an Alderaanian Cruiser because it's a ship from Alderaan, not made by Alderaan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.