Talk:Kursae
Notes (2016)[edit]
Nesekomoye -oid. Krichat-nik. Chamaks. Spinward. Foreven.
- Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 12:40, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
Parsec is 3.26 lightyears (2016)[edit]
- The calculation for parsec to lightyear is inverted. This makes all the other calculations in the first paragraph incorrect.
- It also confuses distances, area, and volume. Which is the correct starting values for the source?
- 70.20.41.116 13:04, 12 November 2016 (EST)
- Hey, stranger. Would you fix it to what it should be? Please.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 17:27, 12 November 2016 (EST)
- The original source mention in the article says the T5 Core rules: This includes the following information:
- There was a time, after the Ancients and before the rise of Humaniti, when another intelligent race – the Kursae – rose to technological power, reached the stars, and then faded to obscurity.
- From an unidentified home-world somewhere in now-Charted Space, these sophonts reached out and settled nearly five thousand worlds across half the galaxy.
- Over the next thousand centuries these many worlds of the Kursae all followed a common path: a downward spiral to a comfortable low technology level where they are today… sharing a common heritage of myths about their past. -> p. 16
- (language) Flash (User) Kursae (Descripition) The Perception-based Poice language of the Kursae. -> p. 133
- The Kursae regressed to about TL-4. -> p. 495
- The only other source is Marc!
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 00:52, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
Description inaccuracy (2018)[edit]
In the DESCRIPTION area, you say their area was 3000 parsecs across, then later you say their area was only 80 light years across.
A sector is 32x40 parsecs, meaning a 3000 parsec diameter would be 75 sectors tall and 94 Sectors wide (or multiply those by 4 if talking in Subsectors). Since a Sector contains 1280 square parsecs, and a 3000 parsec diameter circle contains about 28.27 MILLION square parsecs, that's an area of roughly 22,000 Sectors. (Multiply by 16 if talking in Subsectors.)
That is SIGNIFICANTLY MORE than the 2 Sector figure you give. (If you're talking about volumes rather than areas, the numbers get even worse.)
As I don't have the reference in question, I cannot correct this.
Out of T5 book. Might have been ammended since last input.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 18:33, 19 November 2018 (EST)