Talk:Carrack-class light cruiser/Legends

Should the name of this article be changed to match the bolded words "Carrack-class light cruiser?" JimRaynor55 22:42, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Possibly. I left it as it was because there was already several links to this location. I probably would be better to move it though... So I will. heh. --Beeurd 00:28, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 * The ship is generally refered to as the Carrack-class light cruiser, but it is generally considered proper form to not be overly specific in the ship type. "Light cruiser" doesn't go too far -- "light escort carrier cruiser" might. =) I think in this case it works either way. --SparqMan 01:15, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio
Does anyone else think this page reads a lot like it was copied straight out of the essential guide to vehicles? --Maru 06:54, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * If thats the case and you have the book, then you can edit the article to not sound so plagiaristic. -- Riffsyphon1024 16:39, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I originally wrote the article from memory, then referred to the essential guide for specifics, and looking back now, it does appear that I copied it in my own words, as the structure is almost identical. However, that was not my intention. Feel free to rewrite the article if appropriate. --Beeurd 22:06, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I haven't looked at the EG, but most of their articles follow a logical structure, IIRC: background, description of vehicle, operational history. Seems like the structure most vehicle articles follow, or ought to. As long as the words are your own, I don't see anything wrong with it. --SparqMan 00:33, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * There was one sentence that really struck me as derivative, so I will change that one, but otherwise, I think I might have overreacted... Gomen. --Maru 00:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Which sentence, just out of interest? --Beeurd 20:56, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * The last one, and the ones about safety. --Maru 18:34, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah okay. *re-reads* Fair enough observation, actually... I'll be more original next time. lol --Beeurd 20:57, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Automation
"The ship's controls were simple and automated enough so that two people could operate the vessel." Two people can control a 350 meter warship? I hadn't seen that before. --SparqMan 21:55, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)
 * Anakin did a pretty good job landing the Invisible Hand. And in Heir to the Empire they had Mon Cal cruisers with skeleton crews of like 15 guys. -LtNOWIS 00:00, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, if you can slave-rig the entire Katana fleet, you could have two people pilot a Carrack. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 00:33, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)
 * Plus, "can operate the vessel" doesn't necessarily mean "can operate the vessel effectively and efficiently". That's why the Katana fleet still had 2000 crewers on each ship, even though technically one person on the Katana's bridge could control all 200 Dreadnaughts. 68.47.234.131 09:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 12:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Revision
Fairly extensive revision. I'm not sure whether the "old, not terribly useful" bias in the article came from the EGVV or someone's rephrasing of that; but it's hardly borne out by the ISB or the novels and RPG material. I've tried to rewrite the page to balance what was there before with the fact that, while neither big nor new, they're tough, fast, versatile little ships. --McEwok 16:57, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * The bias defintely came from the EGVV. I'm pretty sure that I added that. :) --Maru  (talk) Contribs 22:54, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)

ThonBoka
What's the source for the ThonBoka cruisers AND the Wennis being Carracks? The Wennis is specifically mentioned as being an older model cruiser, has a 'cavernous' docking bay, easily carries at least 23 fighters and five "pinnaces" with hyperdrives (each capable of towing, with some work, 23 fighters), and additionally is wedge-shaped (well, trowel-shaped). We don't get any more specific than "cruiser" in StarCave of ThonBoka, and the one "cruiser" we get a good look at( the Respectable) at has a 200 meter docking bay (longer than an Impstar's, but can probably be assumed to be) and sounds awfully like a Star Destroyer. There's nothing to say the Recalcitrant, the Reluctant, the Reliable or the Courteous are any different (and Lando seems to consider them equivalent when he's visiting), especially given the unusual-for-Imp-ships naming pattern. Old EU, so "cruiser" is apparently being used in the sense Han Solo used it. Also, the Courteous creates a blast big enough to kill 1000 creatures ranging from half a klick to a klick long outright. Yrfeloran 22:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, with this information, I suppose that these aren't Carracks. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)