|
This wiki is closed in favour of the new wiki. Information shown is likely to be very out of date. |
Difference between revisions of "Talk:War of Sol"
Dancing.Lady (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I know it's not really necessary, but if someone wishes me to, I can give a (somewhat) detailed report of the event of Starlancer from the 2160-2162 storyline. Somewhat a good trivia, if you wish. [[User:Dancing.Lady|Dancing.Lady]] 23:08, 16 November 2009 (MST) | I know it's not really necessary, but if someone wishes me to, I can give a (somewhat) detailed report of the event of Starlancer from the 2160-2162 storyline. Somewhat a good trivia, if you wish. [[User:Dancing.Lady|Dancing.Lady]] 23:08, 16 November 2009 (MST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Could do... it's canon after all. | ||
| + | War of Sol is a desolate black hole of trivia if you haven't played Starlancer. | ||
| + | Detail it all under a new heading maybe? ~ [[User:Akura|Akura]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | This ENTIRE page needs a re-write badly. I might do it myself shortly, but if someone else wants to do it, that would be great. While the current version has the correct information, it is worded completely wrong and not from a neutral/third party stance. [[User:Westwood|Westwood]] | ||
Latest revision as of 03:55, 31 August 2010
The Bohlman Treaty ambush was not after 50 years of war, but after years of military buildup. This attack started the war.
I know it's not really necessary, but if someone wishes me to, I can give a (somewhat) detailed report of the event of Starlancer from the 2160-2162 storyline. Somewhat a good trivia, if you wish. Dancing.Lady 23:08, 16 November 2009 (MST)
Could do... it's canon after all.
War of Sol is a desolate black hole of trivia if you haven't played Starlancer.
Detail it all under a new heading maybe? ~ Akura
This ENTIRE page needs a re-write badly. I might do it myself shortly, but if someone else wants to do it, that would be great. While the current version has the correct information, it is worded completely wrong and not from a neutral/third party stance. Westwood
