Franz Co (ms_slasher@mail.com)
Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:54:32 -0500 (EST)


>------Original Message------
>From: "Edmund Chiu" <edf91@worldnet.att.net>
>To: <gundam@aeug.org>
>Sent: November 13, 2000 10:33:36 PM GMT
>Subject: Re: [gundam] Role of Warships in UC: Was: I-Fields...

*snip*

> I think you misunderstand part of my "theory" (I know I >should've been
>more clear on that, but I thought everybody knew it too) - >warships are,
and
>will still be, a factor in major wars, even with the >introduction of MS.
But
>the introduction of MS shift the "deciding factor" of war - >it's shifted
>from who had the most ships to who had the most MS (assuming >the quality
>isn't that far off). I believe Mark or other GML veterans >discuss the
major
>factor in Fed's victory over Zion, and I believe it's because >the Fed can
>produce a quality MS (GM isn't as good as Rick Dom and the >other "higher
>grade" MS Zion produced, but it's certainly better than the >Zakus, a major
>part of Zion's force) in great quantity. Nobody is saying we >should
abandon
>warships, we (at least I am) are saying that MS will be the >deciding
factor
>of the war, so it deserve most of the attention, BUT we should >still keep
an
>eye on the warships and such so they won't get outdated and >outclass by a
>mile by the enemy force.

Does this explain why warship development falls slows down during the second
universal century. The Lar Kairam class 1st seen in CCA (0093) is still in
service until V Gundam (0153).

> Yes, indeed, I have been following it. Both of you should a lack in
knowledge
> about the use of warship in a battle. I'm no expert, but I do have an
> educated opinion on this subject.

Unless I miss something, I think you're arguing the role of "warship" in
UC style war, while I believe, at least for me, the role of all ships
(meaning carrier, battleships and what not) in UC timeline.

> If this was a "private" thread, then way is on the mailing list in the
first
> place? If you did want someone jumping in and expressing their opinion,
then
> you two should have moved this discussion off this list. But since you
> didn't, this thread is on topic, and I'm a member with voice I feel should
> heard, I have decide to point out a few "details" that seem to be assumed
but
> not wholly true.

I am just saying that it's strange, to me at least, that you would jump
into the thread so late, and the point you bring out seems to be pretty
"minor" and doesn't seem to be adding to the "basis" of the thread (meaning
you seems to be talking about the details without relating it to the subject
of discussion, at least to me). Sorry if I sound rude or something, but it
seems that you are dragging the direction of the thread to something else
(although now that I think about it, the subject clearly said the role of
warships. When the thread first "started", it was mainly about the use of
I-Field on ships and whether that would be useful, and now it shifted to
whether ships are important enough to have I-Field, a technology that's
relatively unproven and expensive. I guess I just don't see what's your post
has to do with "that topic"). Besides, as everybody can see, only three
people seems to be in the thread {at least the part about I-Field on ships
recently) then suddenly someone jump in. It's like people talking in front
of a theater - wouldn't you be "angry" when you and your friends are talking
about a certain topic then suddenly somebody else jump in with his/her own
opinion. What's bothering me is that your first post seems to be just
"details" post without trying to tying it into the topic...

> I do apologize for that. I just made some software changes, and I haven't
> figure out how to shut off the html crap that keeps popping up. Of course,
I
> seem to be able to edit your post fine, even with the html ... maybe it's
> just you?

I just mean that most of the time, it's hard to see which part of the
post is a quote from other messages, which part is the "original" message.
Most people's setup of their e-mail program is that it would reply in the
same "style" of the original e-mail, and sometime that can be useful, so
people like me don't want to mess with that. I do believe there are other
people on the list that don't really like the html style of e-mail, and I
politely ask you to change it back to regular text style, if possible.
What's wrong with that? I don't see any reason for you to "put the spotlight
on me" with a "smart" remark...

>
> Any way, if you don't want me or anyone else to state an opinion, then
don't
> both replying, just move this thread off list. Just my opinion, of
course...

Well, I was pretty sure the thread was dying anyway, since it doesn't
seem to be going anywhere. I am pretty sure it's just me, since my opinions
and thoughts seems to always be in minority on the list anyway, so you can
continue and discuss it to your heart's content. It's a public list, after
all...

Sorry, Mr Zhou, you are on your own on this one ^_^ Although he seems to
share your "interest" in details ^_^

-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/

____________________________________________________________________________
Shop through Barnes and Nobles
http://bn.bfast.com/booklink/click?sourceid=32079226&categoryid=h
help me earn cash too.

______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Nov 14 2000 - 22:40:12 JST