Talk:Legend of Galactic Heroes Gaiden (OVA)

From Gineipaedia, the Legend of Galactic Heroes wiki

Revision as of 13:12, 17 September 2011

Article title

I was thinking about this, and it occurred to me that we might need to rename this article to Legend of Galactic Heroes Gaiden (OVA). After all, the novels and manga are also called Gaiden, aren't they?  ♥ kine @ 15:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Technically, yes, but I'm not certain it's necessary. I think the manga may have a sub-title, however. Canary 15:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Translation issues

I dislike some of these translations (most are copied directly from CA — i have made a few changes, but they're small). I don't want to write up a whole thing on the translation notes page, so i'll just quickly make some notes here:

• A Short Trip to the Past — I don't see 'short' listed as one of the synonyms for the hiragana there. A little trip seems possibly more accurate. But i'm not sure

• Chronicle of the Second Battle of Tiamat, Part I — I think a more literal translation would be 'Chronicle I of the Second Battle of Tiamat', because it does not use the kanji for 'part'. Is that OK in English? (Same for Part II)

• Planet POW Camp — I hate this title. It must be changed! Some possible alternatives: 'The Prison Planet', 'The Internment Camp Planet', 'The Detention Planet', &c.

• A Rebellion of Microscopic Size — The title 'A Microscopic Rebellion' certainly rolls off the tongue better in English. However, i am unsure if we should go that route, because 'size' is written in katakana. Is writing out 'microscope size' that way the standard method of doing it in Japanese? If so, we can change it. If not, then they've probably put it in there because they wanted to emphasise the word 'size' (and thus we should keep it)

• A Thread from the Past — 'Threads from the Past' sounds better to me, but since i haven't seen the episode i can't understand the context. ( ps don't spoil it for me :/ )

• The Journey in Search of the Exit — Maybe 'A Journey in Search of a Way Out' or something? Just sounds weird the way it is

(As mentioned before i have not seen any of Spiral Labyrinth yet, so if i am missing context on these, that's why)  ♥ kine @ 03:12, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your re-naming suggestions all sound fine to me, and work because the Japanese is sufficiently open to interpretation. Regarding "Planet POW Camp," I don't remember what the kanji for that was, but I would suggest "The Prison Planet." (Always gotta go for the alliteration after all.

Oh, and I'm not sure if this would require altering templates or crap like that, but I'm fairly certain "Duelist" is spelled with only a single "L." Canary

It's spelt with two L's in UK English — see, for example, The Duellists. As far as the titles, if you're OK with what i've suggested then i'll get around to changing them eventually (i have so many things to do, jc)  ♥ kine @ 20:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

スパイラル・ラビリンス=Spiral Labyrinth is the title of the whole package. Almael 18:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Canon inconsistancy or contradictions

• Position of Kapche-Lanka and Legnica Chapter I (SWV episode) has been moved to after Tiamat instead above and to the right of Iserlohn.
• The 'double snake ring' tactic by Yang being first employed by him is contradicted by Bruce Ashbey's tactic.
• As well as Reinhard's double headed tactic in the same battle.
• The FPA ships in Bruce Ashbey's era looks like from an earlier era than the historic ships seen in(LOGH: 'Julian's Journey, Mankind's Journey').
• Current FPA standard cruiser wrongly 'drawn' with extra engines which weren't engines before.
• The dialogues use the Phezzani dinar currency Prisoners and Hostages (episode) instead of the dollar currency when referring to FPA money being stolen.

There are probably more. Almael 18:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The look of ships could be explained away as as perhaps a change in design philosophy on the part of both sides (perhaps as the result of weapon or material technology progression). Certainly there seems to be a very significant revamping of the Imperial destroyer design from the era of Bruce Ashbey to the more recent missile and railgun armed Imperial destroyer. Speculative but it could reflect a desire to maximize alpha strike and short range capabilities over longer battlefield endurance. The change from angular boxy ships from the Dagon era to the curved hulls of the Bruce Ashbey era and back to the boxy ships of the Yang era could parallel how tank armor started out boxy, then went to sloped curved steel armor, then back to angular slab sided with composite armor

That theory is faulty to begin with because changes in design philosophy always survive in later generations, they do not disappear completely. Logically: There is always the desire to maximize fire power whether in the past or future. So it is a mute point, but designs that help maximize weapon usage will be used forever. There won't be much change from this kind of engineering view point. From an artistic point sure there are all kinds of reasons. The tank comparison is wrong on several points:

• In the past slopped design were not possible due to primitive manufacture. It has nothing to do with design perse.
• Today we went back because we want to minimize size.

Battlefield endurance is one major important point. It's the single difference between survival or victory and defeat.

Btw. in Gaiden 1 or the movies designs from the manga were used for the time slot bewteen the main series and Bruce Ashbey's era.Almael 18:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

That is what I meant when I said design philosophy change as a result of material technology. We don't know for example whether some new composite or armor was developed after the Ashbey era, that could not be so easily made into curved plates, meaning a return to flat plates, or whether due to the material's properties it actually performed better in flat plates. The old material from the Dagon era may have been able to be manufactured in curved shapes by the Ashbey era due to technological advancement. Alternatively perhaps due to other factors such as economic factors, it was deemed inefficient (too much effort for insufficient return) to continue to make curved armor plates for ships. Nonetheless, the overall main design themes of both the Empire and the FPA are sustained during the series. The FPA ships still have their single huge engine, whereas the Imperial ships have multiple engines, for example. Ship for ship, the FPA tended to continue to mount greater number of frontal guns. Even so not all the changes in look are purely technological. Just as the Empire dramatically changed its destroyer design, the FPA seems to have phased out its high speed cruiser/battlecruiser from the Asbhey era, with no replacement. Clearly there were other considerations at work.

Iracundus 01:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

This may be somewhat lenghtly. I think we should move this discussion to a LoGH Starship technology and Design discussion page. But I will leave this to a higher authority or a second opinion for that matter. I think it's a bit too much interpreting into a story which didn't care much about starship design from the beginning but has been "augmented" over time.However, I don't mind discussing it. :DIt's very unlikely engineers would accept a step back because of manufaturing problems only. For example, the F117 stealth fighter was facetted because computer technology and the russian radar reflection theory were not refined enough for a curved design. It wasn't a manufacturing problem. Anyway, we are talking about big ships here. Even if manufacturing restricts curved form and size, it's still by far no problem to build smooth surface and curvy ships. It would have to be a real incompetent starship builder who wouldn't be able to do this. The Bruce Ashbey's era FPA ship engines are way out of proportion. It's like there is no considering for fuel at all. This has no ounce of any engineering/reality whether fiction or not. The theory of engine number is faulty because the Imperial ships are bigger than FPA ships. One of their engine is big enough for a FPA ship. Some FPA ships do have more than one engine (transport, engineering).Besides the FPA groups engines together to a block so they do seem as one but are not, like the assault ship. The same goes for the cannons. Although, FPA ships have more cannons they are smaller and overall power is the same or less, actually. If this was reality I would say less and the FPA had never had a chance to begin with. Since, we are speculating on other consideration: The reason why the Empire change the destroyer design was probably because it's nearly as big as a FPA cruiser. The FPA phased out the highspeed cruisers because they lacked endurance. It's a waste to have ships that get destroyed instantly. Besides this point is purely rewriting canon. The only consideration of anime LoGH ships that are not class(function) related are the sloped/curvy designs of the Brunhild and Parcival to the advantage of their armor, and the Ahsgrim's transformation for its super cannon. If you ever take a look at the novels you will notice the FPA ship arts are curvy (way better) and have lots of engines. The Empire designs are less sightly. Except for some technologies there are no definitive set differences in the novels. It's all up to the artists. In this Gaiden 2 case they probably wanted "birdy" silhouettes.Almael 09:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd be interested to see a screencap of "Current FPA standard cruiser wrongly 'drawn' with extra engines which weren't engines before." - I have all the Gaiden, of course, but I don't remember seeing that and wouldn't know where to see it. Oh and Iracandus, please remember to sign off all your posts. Four tildes., tyvm :) Vympel 10:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Gaiden1 ep23 FPA cruiser

Gaiden1 ep23 FPA cruiser

Gaiden2 ep27 FPA cruiser

Gaiden2 ep28 FPA cruiser