Talk:Warlock class destroyer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Rumors and truth about Aegis
Hi everybody. greets from Russian-lang part of wiki, -ru B5 fans.
Can i know something more about the rumors that says that the WarlockAegis-type main gun can destroy Sharlin from one shot?
I need to write the same article in russian wiki and i know for sure, that the phrases of this kind needs some refers and links to be received by our society.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zac Allan (talk • contribs) 00:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC).
Warlock has powerful array of weapons, but I strongly doubt it can destroy Sharlin Cruiser with only one shot. It has very powerful advanced heavy laser cannons (first seen on Omega X Destroyers/Heavy Cruisers) but I doubt it can destroy Sharlin with the one shot. Perhaps 2-3 shots would do a lot of damage and 4-5 might even destroy Sharlin but it is all relative. After all Sharlin Cruisers happened to be very powerful ships, no younger race can really match Minibary military, even Warlock will have hard time taking out Sharlin cruiser, but with Warlcok class, EA is a formidable foe and even Minbari now recognize this fact.
In B5 universe Warlcok' Heavy Cruisers (Destroyers - I had a chat with John Copeland and JMS about this while back and both agreed Destroyer is just general designation not real class of the warship) are most formidable weapons that EA has (apart of Victory class which are combined effort of Earth Alliance and Minbari), by 2280, EA had large number of these, perhaps 50, and Omega were by than pushed to secondary role, as a support patrol cruisers only. Omega itself is not a weak ship, it is far more formidable than anything Narn's had, and could give Centary a good run for money.
Warlock is by far after Victory class Battleships (Destroyers) most powerful warship in EA. It would be logical to build Victory class (which are about 4 times as expensive as an Warlock) only in few numbers and fill in the gap with the Warlock heavy cruisers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.167.100 (talk) 16:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)