System and Battle Maps

Daryl wrote:I learnt something tonight. Always assumed Annachie was a particularly bright Aussie bloke, now I know she is an Aussie sheila it becomes clearer. Welcome indeed Walks Alone, it falls to a few others The E (German), Eyal (Israeli), and Michael Everett (UK) to keep these Americans in line.

So that's what you all have been doing, keeping us Americans in line? Well, I suppose I owe you a bit of thanks because American arrogance surpasses even the League's. I married a Brit to help tame my shit. I was going to mention that I think Daryl is also from Aussie, but wasn't sure my memory was intact on that fact.

I agree that Annachie represents you Aussies quite well. Though I didn't know that there were any bright blokes hailing from the land down under, and only one Crockodile Dundee. I can jest about that because a very good friend of mine is from Brisbane and he married my second grade girlfriend. His nickname is Knocks, because he uses his head to open a can of beer. Well, he did in college anyways. We jest with him that he illuminated why its called Down Under. Down Under the IQ. Seriously, he's a really fine fellow and I've never met anyone from down under that I didn't like. And I love your country. I just don't understand why all the girls are named Sheila. LOL

Annachie has Ann or Anna as a root.

****** *

Hans wrote:Hello,

what shall i say?
Thanks to @cthia - incredible thing for us who
- don't hear that well
- and/or are not native English speakers

Very welcome. It really pulled at my heartstrings that many like yourself were left out. I remember someone requesting it several times. That really didn't sit too well with me. I have never had a problem putting the shoe on the other foot. It has gotten me in a pickle quite a bit over the years, and this one was a particularly sour dill transcribing. There really is joy in giving, though. Again, if I longed for a snippet and an entire chapter was delivered in Klingon or your awful German language, I'd toss my entire computer in a cultivator. I wish I could have delivered it sooner, but I thought that the author would have. Or was going to.

I appreciate everyone's appreciation, I just hope I didn't annoy a certain citizen who may be suffering from having the runs from celery. It was certainly not my intentions to supersede any of his plans or wishes.

The video may have been a more formal, or commercial snippet. I don't know whether the people attending that reading with the Weber paid for it and in the future may decide that if it is going to be posted later there's no need to attend.

On that note. I certainly will not expect any of you members to come to my aid if his celeryness comes after me with a pitchfork. No need for anyone else to suffer when we can minimize the collateral damage. LOL

.

cthia wrote:I appreciate everyone's appreciation, I just hope I didn't annoy a certain citizen who may be suffering from having the runs from celery. It was certainly not my intentions to supersede any of his plans or wishes.

The video may have been a more formal, or commercial snippet. I don't know whether the people attending that reading with the Weber paid for it and in the future may decide that if it is going to be posted later there's no need to attend.

On that note. I certainly will not expect any of you members to come to my aid if his celeryness comes after me with a pitchfork. No need for anyone else to suffer when we can minimalize the collateral damage. LOL

Don't see the reason for any pitchfork-fear. That video has "official" right over the screen, at least in my opinion - and David had to know, that his panel was recorded and would be finally published in the 'net - Facebook, Youtube - whereever. He didn't make a fit then - so there's no reason why he should do it now.

Eagleeye wrote:

cthia wrote:I appreciate everyone's appreciation, I just hope I didn't annoy a certain citizen who may be suffering from having the runs from celery. It was certainly not my intentions to supersede any of his plans or wishes.

The video may have been a more formal, or commercial snippet. I don't know whether the people attending that reading with the Weber paid for it and in the future may decide that if it is going to be posted later there's no need to attend.

On that note. I certainly will not expect any of you members to come to my aid if his celeryness comes after me with a pitchfork. No need for anyone else to suffer when we can minimalize the collateral damage. LOL

Don't see the reason for any pitchfork-fear. That video has "official" right over the screen, at least in my opinion - and David had to know, that his panel was recorded and would be finally published in the 'net - Facebook, Youtube - whereever. He didn't make a fit then - so there's no reason why he should do it now.

'Tis my take on it as well, absent any attempts to second guess the author.

My apologies for posting this in this thread. I forgot which thread I was in for a moment. A temporary loss of the kinesthetic sense shared by Honor? LOL

Wow, there's so much here to respond to... I might have to do it bit by bit...

A female slant on things is always welcome.

I'll comment more on that in a moment... "feminist" has become a dirty word, I'm sorry to say... would you not hold it against me if I said I wasn't the crazy vindictive kind?

Welcome to the forums. It is customary to offer a bottle of spirits.

I wonder if they still have Pimms in the Honorverse?

Annachie has Ann or Anna as a root.

Not unless she's a lesbian

Actually, I think it's a political reference... being a homophone for "anarchy" and all...

Walks Alone, you make me feel a bit inadequate. It seems you are more on the ball than I. I suffered from more mundane things like being able to distinguish the front of Honorverse ships from the rear. It reminded me of the car whose rear looks like the front. I forget which car that is at the moment. But alas, some idiot went and designed his own. I also suffered from ship orientation when talking about "standing her up" and turning to open broadsides. I'm better now, but in the earlier days as a member I was suffering from Trekindoctrination.

FYI, we have a resident guru for all holotank two-dimensional drawings of ships. His name is MaxxQ.

Anyway, now for the next thing, where I try not to sound like a crazy feminist lol.

It's worth noting that my grandfather was an officer in the British Army.

My mother very nearly joined the Royal Air Force, but ended up going with Customs and Excise instead. Which isn't exactly Navy, but it does involve ships.

Both my parents had a strong interest in war films... my father in the Napoleonic wars and WWII, and my mother in more modern warfare... G.I. Jane and Top Gun for example.

So I'm not exactly sure if that counts as coming from a military background, but I did have the advantage that I knew the phonetic alphabet off by heart from childhood, and I can convert between 24 hour time and 12 hour time without even thinking about it.

Anyway... it's almost carrying on a tradition that my interest is military science fiction... And gender does play a role in that... I find that when reading military fiction set in the past, it's basically a boys club... this may sound weird, but I can't quite properly relate to the characters because of this. Whereas when reading the Honorverse, and other such things, women are also represented in the ranks, and I find I can "slip in to the world" a lot easier than I can when reading Hornblower for example.

Oh, and one other thing... the forum ranking system has me down as "Midshipman"... I know that's more of a programming thing than being intentionally exclusive (so I'm not complaining about it, just hoping my middy cruise will be over soon), but this is one of the things I'm talking about.

Just because you didn't notice something doesn't make you inadequate. Didn't Honor say something about seeing something and thinking it's something else? And I might have gotten it wrong after all Or we might both be right.

Hmm... distinguishing between the bow and the stern... is there any reason there has to be a difference? Aren't the fore and aft impeller rings the same?

I actually have been referring to Maxx's drawings for quite some time now... and I hunger for more

https://maxxqbunine.deviantart.com/gallery/

Walks Alone wrote:Just because you didn't notice something doesn't make you inadequate.

Some of us have combed through the books in the support of old arguments, and had other people poke holes in our arguments pointing to other passages we overlooked. So our arguments on points that mostly bored everyone else 5 years ago are in fact pretty polished.

welcome aboard!

Everyone starts as a midshipman, ratings are earned by you number of posts.

Agree some sort of battle evolution view would be helpful, although there might be some that don't actually work. Or maybe my spatial analysis is off and a good layout would clarify. In any case, you're not alone in scratching your head on details.

I've also felt an integrated timeline would help me keep track of events. Maybe something built on
http://simile-widgets.org/timeline/ . If there's a good one out there, I haven't seen it.

Walks Alone wrote:Hmm... distinguishing between the bow and the stern... is there any reason there has to be a difference? Aren't the fore and aft impeller rings the same?

Ships can only accelerate in the "forward" direction. I think armor and armaments are biased depending on whether you're chasing or chased. And of course, pod designs have the aft hatch.