Talk:Glilandy - Revision history

Valaggar: /* Glilandy or Benteflork? */ tried to answer own question

2007-11-05T16:33:35Z

Glilandy or Benteflork?: tried to answer own question

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:33, 5 November 2007
Line 26:		Line 26:

	Why would we name the article Glilandy and not Benteflork? The latter is the name most people will be familiar with (UQM is more popular than DOS SC2); also, since Benteflork was assigned after Glilandy and by the same people, shouldn't we consider that it constitutes a change in lore from DOS to 3DO, just like, for example, some Pkunk lines that didn't sound too Pkunk-y were removed? [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 14:29, 29 August 2007 (CEST)		Why would we name the article Glilandy and not Benteflork? The latter is the name most people will be familiar with (UQM is more popular than DOS SC2); also, since Benteflork was assigned after Glilandy and by the same people, shouldn't we consider that it constitutes a change in lore from DOS to 3DO, just like, for example, some Pkunk lines that didn't sound too Pkunk-y were removed? [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 14:29, 29 August 2007 (CEST)

			:I guess it's because we don't know how "Benteflork" is actually spelled? [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 17:33, 5 November 2007 (CET)

Valaggar: Glilandy or Benteflork?

2007-08-29T12:29:10Z

Glilandy or Benteflork?

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:29, 29 August 2007
Line 22:		Line 22:

	::It could be any arid moon as I read it. — [[User:Svdb\|SvdB]] 11:47, 13 July 2006 (CEST)		::It could be any arid moon as I read it. — [[User:Svdb\|SvdB]] 11:47, 13 July 2006 (CEST)

			== Glilandy or Benteflork? ==

			Why would we name the article Glilandy and not Benteflork? The latter is the name most people will be familiar with (UQM is more popular than DOS SC2); also, since Benteflork was assigned after Glilandy and by the same people, shouldn't we consider that it constitutes a change in lore from DOS to 3DO, just like, for example, some Pkunk lines that didn't sound too Pkunk-y were removed? [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 14:29, 29 August 2007 (CEST)

Svdb: /* Is it a moon? */ reply

2006-07-13T09:47:51Z

Is it a moon?: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:47, 13 July 2006
Line 20:		Line 20:
	:<Fwiffo> The talking pets left after the defeat of the Ur-Quan were probably destroyed -- all except for a few who were left on an arid moon.		:<Fwiffo> The talking pets left after the defeat of the Ur-Quan were probably destroyed -- all except for a few who were left on an arid moon.
	Does this mean that Glilandy/Bentleflork is an arid moon, or is there a part of the game I'm forgetting, or something else...?		Does this mean that Glilandy/Bentleflork is an arid moon, or is there a part of the game I'm forgetting, or something else...?

			::It could be any arid moon as I read it. — [[User:Svdb\|SvdB]] 11:47, 13 July 2006 (CEST)

Fyzixfighter: Is it a moon?

2006-07-13T04:26:54Z

Is it a moon?

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:26, 13 July 2006
Line 13:		Line 13:

	Destroying a planet is something that involves titanic, impossible amounts of energy and would be a thoroughly useless thing to do in almost any situation -- wars are fought between the people who live on planets, not between the enormous hunks of rock themselves. They don't need the power to blow up planets any more than we need the power to level mountains -- in both cases all we need is the power to blow up cities. "Blowing up a planet" is a trope from the rather sillier kinds of science fiction because it looks and sounds cool, not because it's at all realistic.		Destroying a planet is something that involves titanic, impossible amounts of energy and would be a thoroughly useless thing to do in almost any situation -- wars are fought between the people who live on planets, not between the enormous hunks of rock themselves. They don't need the power to blow up planets any more than we need the power to level mountains -- in both cases all we need is the power to blow up cities. "Blowing up a planet" is a trope from the rather sillier kinds of science fiction because it looks and sounds cool, not because it's at all realistic.

			== Is it a moon? ==

			How is this statement by Paul and Fred usually interpreted:
			:<_Stilgar> <che`z`puf> when the Ur-Quan were forced to surrender, were the Dynarri destroyed?
			:<Fwiffo> The talking pets left after the defeat of the Ur-Quan were probably destroyed -- all except for a few who were left on an arid moon.
			Does this mean that Glilandy/Bentleflork is an arid moon, or is there a part of the game I'm forgetting, or something else...?

130.58.225.137 at 16:32, 16 February 2005

2005-02-16T16:32:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 16 February 2005
Line 7:		Line 7:
	...No power to wipe out the planet, huh? Death-Star-style, huh?		...No power to wipe out the planet, huh? Death-Star-style, huh?
	...Ever heard of the Sa-Matra?...		...Ever heard of the Sa-Matra?...

			Yes. The Sa-Matra blows up enemy ships. Have you ever seen a single reference to it blowing up planets? (Do you know how much energy actually blowing up a planet entails? One of the least realistic parts of Star Wars -- to impart enough energy to a planet-sized body to blow it apart into pieces that don't immediately slam back together under the force of gravity would require more energy than our sun emits in a day.) The Sa-Matra is powerful because it has very long range and can pick off enemy ships from a distance without fear of reprisal, not because it has unlimited amounts of firepower.

			The most powerful weapons in SC2 are the Precursor Bombs, which are explicitly said to be "planetary engineering tools" yet are only powerful enough to break apart a "small moon" (probably Phobos-sized) or "make a big crater" in a planet. The Bomb still had to be enhanced by the Vindicator's systems before it could blow up the Sa-Matra -- which is far smaller than a planet. And the most destructive event we've seen, the Shofixti Ultimate Glory Device made from a Precursor Bomb inside a sun, only created a massive flare of radiation that killed everything on Kyabetsu but far from destroyed Kyabetsu.

			Destroying a planet is something that involves titanic, impossible amounts of energy and would be a thoroughly useless thing to do in almost any situation -- wars are fought between the people who live on planets, not between the enormous hunks of rock themselves. They don't need the power to blow up planets any more than we need the power to level mountains -- in both cases all we need is the power to blow up cities. "Blowing up a planet" is a trope from the rather sillier kinds of science fiction because it looks and sounds cool, not because it's at all realistic.

213.255.162.163 at 10:01, 16 February 2005

2005-02-16T10:01:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:01, 16 February 2005
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Also, much of this info belongs in the Dnyarri entry, not the Glilandy entry.		Also, much of this info belongs in the Dnyarri entry, not the Glilandy entry.



			...No power to wipe out the planet, huh? Death-Star-style, huh?
			...Ever heard of the Sa-Matra?...

130.58.248.89 at 19:52, 11 February 2005

2005-02-11T19:52:42Z

New page

The idea that the planet was physically destroyed, Death-Star-style, is not "likely" at all. The Ur-Quan have never evinced this level of power, nor would that kind of overkill be necessary -- there's nothing about the physical existence of a planet that says that a particular kind of species must evolve there. After all the Dnyarri were killed or changed into Talking Pets, there's no reason to think Glilandy wasn't left as a lifeworld or, at *most*, scorched away into a deadworld. But the idea that the Ur-Quan have the power or the propensity to actually blow up planets is silly.

Also, much of this info belongs in the Dnyarri entry, not the Glilandy entry.