Subject:
|
Re: Galactic Shipyard updates and change
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Nov 2000 01:28:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1411 times
|
| |
|
|
> I personally consider a "capital ship" to be destroyer size or larger. And
> my ship is only a little bigger than a 747 in length
>
> We won't go into width problems brought up by a minifig.
>
> My point is that the ships on the site are considered "Capital size" if they
> are over 60 studs in length. I think it should be more like 100 but we'll
> get into that later.
YAY! My capital ship is 106 studs long! WHOO-HOO! :D
Just measured it.
> Anyway.. where did the term "Capital" come from? Anyone know the true
> definition of this?
Good question. I'd sure like to know.
Trev
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Galactic Shipyard updates and change
|
| "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:ie830to8s6gdtm4...4ax.com... (...) always (...) Yep there won't shouldn't be any more category splits for a while. (...) Well I put it in the Science Category but I really think that thats a (...) (26 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.space)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
