Difference between revisions of "Talk:GVD Hatshepsut"
From FreeSpace Wiki
(Reply) |
m (i said something foul.) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Response to [http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php?title=GVD_Hatshepsut&curid=1158&diff=22027&oldid=22026| this]. It is inferred that the GVD Memphis is a Hatshepsut from the fact that the flight deck/main hall, for the short period of time between [[Straight, No Chaser]] and [[Argonautica]] looks identical to that of the [[GVD Psamtik]]'s. - [[User:Droid803|Droid803]] | Response to [http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php?title=GVD_Hatshepsut&curid=1158&diff=22027&oldid=22026| this]. It is inferred that the GVD Memphis is a Hatshepsut from the fact that the flight deck/main hall, for the short period of time between [[Straight, No Chaser]] and [[Argonautica]] looks identical to that of the [[GVD Psamtik]]'s. - [[User:Droid803|Droid803]] | ||
*I think it makes more sense to claim that [V] didn't have time (and/or didn't want) to create a third mainhall. I don't think we can say that the ''Memphis'' was a Hatshepsut only because of its supposed mainhall. Didn't the ''Galatea'' and the ''Bastion'' have different mainhalls? If the ''Memphis'' really was a Hatshepsut, it should have had a third mainhall. It's quite reasonable to assume that the ''Memphis'' was a Hatshepsut because that class of destroyers is extremely important in Vasudan fleets (important enough to transfer the surviving squadrons of the ''Psamtik'' to it) but yet still, we don't have enough info. --- [[User:Mobius|Mobius]] | *I think it makes more sense to claim that [V] didn't have time (and/or didn't want) to create a third mainhall. I don't think we can say that the ''Memphis'' was a Hatshepsut only because of its supposed mainhall. Didn't the ''Galatea'' and the ''Bastion'' have different mainhalls? If the ''Memphis'' really was a Hatshepsut, it should have had a third mainhall. It's quite reasonable to assume that the ''Memphis'' was a Hatshepsut because that class of destroyers is extremely important in Vasudan fleets (important enough to transfer the surviving squadrons of the ''Psamtik'' to it) but yet still, we don't have enough info. --- [[User:Mobius|Mobius]] | ||
| + | **I'd really hate agreeing with Mobius, but he's right on this one IMO. - [[User:Snail|Snail]] 08:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 08:27, 10 April 2009
Same as with the Colossus. Should this be changed into similar format as the other ship pages already have? For the performance and tech descriptions parts. Wanderer 08:52, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Yes. - TopAce 18:09, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
The GVD Memphis
Response to this. It is inferred that the GVD Memphis is a Hatshepsut from the fact that the flight deck/main hall, for the short period of time between Straight, No Chaser and Argonautica looks identical to that of the GVD Psamtik's. - Droid803
- I think it makes more sense to claim that [V] didn't have time (and/or didn't want) to create a third mainhall. I don't think we can say that the Memphis was a Hatshepsut only because of its supposed mainhall. Didn't the Galatea and the Bastion have different mainhalls? If the Memphis really was a Hatshepsut, it should have had a third mainhall. It's quite reasonable to assume that the Memphis was a Hatshepsut because that class of destroyers is extremely important in Vasudan fleets (important enough to transfer the surviving squadrons of the Psamtik to it) but yet still, we don't have enough info. --- Mobius
- I'd really hate agreeing with Mobius, but he's right on this one IMO. - Snail 08:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
