Tank vs battleship, depends where. On the Atlantic, the tank sinks. But on land, the battleship can't do much maneuvering. Perhaps some kind of swampy arena is in order. --- RR16

whoever came up with "Mission Commision" should be lined up and shot

Interesting that we refer to space fleets as naval, but they contain heavy fighters and torpedo bombers and such... airborne things.

Tanks in space... right...........

I can't think of any space sci-fi show with a non-nautical space force. Star Trek has Starfleet, Star Wars has the Imperial Navy, Battlestar Gallactica uses nautical terms (along with many they made up), and there are countless others. Any shows/stories use non-nautical terms? --- RR16

Whoever came up with "Mission COmmision" should be lined up and shot

I was always puzzled by the Wing Commander series, where they couldn't seem to decide whether to use naval ranks or air force. Why would you have majors and commanders?

Then again FL has some downright wierd ranks ... e.g. lieutenant corporal!



Jose Chavez: "Trent! It's good to see my kind of scum."




Edited by - Puke Barwalker on 09-12-2003 04:37:58

I think they use nautical terms because of the capital ships, not the starfighters. Battleship, frigate, carrier, and gunboats are all "naval" names. Some real world fighters are part of the navy, like those certain patrols used by aircraft carrier.

Also, titles like first mate, ensign, captain, admiral, and such would be appropriate for the Navy...

Here is what I think...

In the (for example) 1700's the high seas were the great unknown. Not human's natural habitat and certainly not friendly to humans. All that keps them alive was thier vessel (note the carefull use of the word "vessel" wich held all thier food and water etc.

Space is not unlike this. A hostile environment, the frontier, etc. The vehicles are literaly vessels. They hold in the very air we breath, in addition to food and water. They would also need to be large, and coincidentaly fit the names "carrier" or "battleship" rather well.

Tanks in space?!



BlazeME: Flameus Muchus n00bus

@blaze,

put a tank in a rocket, launch it into space, drop tank, and what do u get
(of it works quite well is an other question)

Spamius Threadius

looking at the spam-menu right now
what shall i order today

---

Tanks against battleships? I will put my bet on the battleship.

---

Depends on the size and amount of tanks you have. This is in space so it may be possible that the tanks would be much larger and therefore have a much larger cannon.

Edited by - DaVoid on 09-12-2003 03:05:41

There are probably a few people who would love to take a Panzer and cause problems for Bretonia.
Give it a custom gun, call it a torpedo... let it equip a couple level 10 guns... give it shields, and dont give it an engine trail... make an exhaust system on the back the thruster... and sell it in Rhineland.




If that's not poison ivy, then lick it...

Shouldn't this thread be somewhere else?

you guys are friggin idiots, when I posted this, I said "TREAD AROUND AND BLAST THINGS" MEANING, on the fu***** planet surface, you dumb fu**s...Unless you're being sarcastic, then you're all right, but tanks in space?!?! IT'S common sense people!!!

Check out coffeebreakarcade.com. They have a game called tank hunter, where you go arround blasting stuff in, guess what, a tank! Try it, the graphics suck, but it will satisfy your lust for blood and things that go boom. Also note, according to Newton's laws of motions (which are ignored in FL, but oh well) a tank fireing a shell would cause a reaction that causes it to spin out of control. Therefore, a tank is worthless in space. Although, a full turrent on a space ship isn't a bad idea (think of all your guns having 360 movement). --- RR16

Whoever came up with "Mission Commision" should be lined up and shot

Using tanks on the planet? That would be stupid. It's a space sim not a Tank Sim

Life: No one gets out alive.