User talk:Andrew

From TemeraireWiki
Revision as of 17:54, 26 September 2008 by Samuel (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Cross Breeding[edit]

Does anyone thing the series will last long enough for the British to do any serious cross breeding with Temeraire? If it were up to you, which species would you cross a Celestial with for the best results? While I think it's tempting to try a cross with the strongest of the other species, Regal Copper, Longwing, or Kazilik, from a practical point of view this would seem less than ideal, given the low number, and slow reproduction of Regal Coppers, and the dangers of poor mixing of structures and losing abilities in other offensively orientated dragons. I personally like the idea of crossing with the Bright Copper, the over large air sacs of the breed may cross well with the Celestial offensive armament, and if the cross worked I'd call it a Bright Wind. Andrew 02:35, 7 November 2007 (PST)

You're right about Regal Coppers, it would be unwise to cross such rare dragons with a smaller breed. The divine wind would compensate for the weight loss, but the probability that the dragon would be able to use this ability is almost zero. Same goes with Longwings - the British might end up with a dragon who could neither spit acid nor use the divine wind. I base this on the problems the Chinese (the best breeders in the world, etc.) have with breeding Celestials.

If I were in this situation I would cross Temeraire with a heavyweight like a Chequered Nettle in hopes that the new breed would inherit the size of a ChN and the flying abilities of a Celestial. A cross with an Anglewing would be interesting as well, if everything went according to the plan the Celestial Anglewing would be the best flyier in the world.

As for the cross with Felicita, I have high hopes for the dragonet precisely because no one thinks that's a good idea :) Who knows, we might end up with a little yellow Celestial.

Natli 04:15, 7 November 2007 (PST)

I like the idea of crossing with an Anglewing, perhaps this could become the Angelwing which is pretty much what I read over and over for ages. Andrew 04:19, 7 November 2007 (PST)

Another option is that the hatchling might end up with only the Imperial genes from Temeraire as his father was an Imperial (is that right, or do I need to read book 2 again?) Do we know if Celestial/Imperial crosses always produce Celestials? Still the flying ability (even without the Divine Wind) will be a boost to the British. A middleweight with good maneuverability is still a valuable dragon as the Anglewing has shown (I read it wrong too). As for a Kazilik/Celestial cross, I don't think Temeraire would agree to that. He seemed to be developing a hearty dislike of Iskierka in the last book. --Mooir 21:03, 7 November 2007 (PST)

Even beyond any potential dislike, I don't think the British could afford to waste one of Iskierka's eggs on a risky cross with Temeraire. The French might go for a Celestial/Fire Breather cross as suggested towards the end of Ivory, but with a single, female, fire breather the British have to concentrate on crosses with the best chance of keeping the fire breathing ability without extra complications. I don't think we "know" that Celestial Imperial crosses always produce Celestials, but it seems likely, every living Celestial is such a cross as all the Celestials are too closely related to allow Celestial/Celestial breeding. Andrew 02:14, 8 November 2007 (PST)

I think the french will not have any celestial line, beacuse Lien is an albino and for that she isn't fertile ... so in the time the better would come in the briths side ... SAM

After reading VoE, I'm beginning to wonder if Celestials are interfertile with any other "breeds" (species?) besides Imperials and other Celestials. Which pretty much shoots any British plans for crossbreeding in the wing. Rose 07:13, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

Dragonback Cannons[edit]

There's not really a good place I can find to start discussions like this on the main site, or any other site I frequent on the net (If you know of somewhere please let me know) so I think I'll start filling my talk page here as this sort of thing occurs to me. Anyway... Is anyone else surprised that there seems to be no mention at all of cannons on dragon back? I know that recoil issues would be a bigger factor than on a ship, the lack of obvious flat spots, and there would be dangers in storing so much powder aboard and so on, but the advantages to having a big gun in the air are so obvious, does anyone else think it is a missed opportunity? Andrew 02:43, 9 November 2007 (PST)

Wait for VoE. Rose 06:32, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

Related Species[edit]

One thing I think is missing from Novik's world is other Draconic creatures. We've seen there is a large number of dragon species, and there's a definite relation to the Sea Serpents, such as the one that attacked the Allegiance, but we've not seen anything else. Dragons if they were around, would be a new Class (Order, Phylum? Biology isn't my strong point Look) of animals. You'd expect to see examples of the class in different niches around the environment. Just live we have mammals ranging from Rats to Whales; fish from Whitebait to Sharks and so on for the other major animal groups. Where is the Draconic Badger? Or at least the Turkey Dragon? Anyone have any thoughts? Andrew 09:08, 2 January 2008 (PST)

Dragons are obviously warm-blooded - it's mentioned pretty frequently that they feel warm to touch. It's also mentioned that cooler climates favour the smaller breeds, while the larger breeds prefer warmer climates where their air sacs are more buoyant. If they were cold-blooded, the opposite would be true - smaller breeds, with a larger ratio of surface air to mass, would have a harder time maintaining body temperature in cooler environments.

There are theories that at least some dinosaurs were warm-blooded, and certainly birds (class Aves) evolved from dinosaurs and are members of the superorder Dinosauria. So I'm guessing that Draconia is also a class in this same superorder, which means Andrew is right, one might expect to find various families, geni and species within this class. (Alternate hypothesis: draconia is a species, but in that case, in which genus, family and class?)

One thing I'm wondering about is, are we sure that all draconic "breeds" are interfertile with each other, or are we, at least in some cases, looking at different species? There's certainly enough range in size and ability to fill various ecological niches. But even if we're looking at Draconia as a genus with different species (Draconia celestialis, for example), that still leaves family and class open to question.

Another thing I'd point out is that we've been learning about dragons pretty much entirely from the viewpoint of military personnel rather than scientific personnel. For example, we don't have a list of every bird, lizard and snake Laurence & Co. saw in China, Central Asia or Africa. So there might have been various draconoid fauna whose presence simply wasn't noted.

I'm looking forward to visiting Australia, already known for its distinct mammals, and hoping for some diversity in draconic evolution as well. Rose 07:10, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

Further thoughts: In the class Mammalia, placental mammals (cohort Placentalia) outperformed marsupial mammals (cohort Marsupialia) on almost all continents. The exceptions are the Americas, where opposums survived, and Australia, where the marsupials took over. So maybe the primitive ancestors of modern day Draco sapiens were sort of like opposums - the one example of their group that *didn't* get wiped out by placental mammals on most of the planet.

The theory is that in Australia, the low metabolic rate of marsupials gave them an advantage over placentals in the hot Australian climate. A hot climate would also favour draconoid families/orders/species by making it easier for them to fly. Thus, perhaps a greater diversity of draconoids survived in Australia along with the marsupials?

Alternate theory: Draco sapiens was once the dominant species on the planet, as Homo sapiens is now. Dragons created advanced civilizations, complete with military-industrial complexes. Warfare and pollution wiped out almost all life on the planet, including the dinosaurs and all the non-intelligent draconoid fauna. The survivors of Draco sapiens retained their intelligence but survived in caves, eating raw meat. Over time, the radioactivity and chemical poisons died down, and a new class, mammals, evolved to fill the vacant ecological niches. Eventually evolution produced an intelligent mammal, Homo sapiens...

Rose 09:15, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

Hahaha, Rose, of course that's what happened *wink wink* You hit the nail on the head with that one! -Laurelhach 15:12, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

Spelling Differences[edit]

You're from Britain, right? Oh boy, is this gonna be fun! Especially when American English and Britain's English have so many differences in spelling!! Oh what joy!! --skie 05:42, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

Yep. I'm going to keep sticking those u's in every time I'm editing a page too. Though I probably wont edit anything to specifically add u's. And it's England's English. :)Andrew 05:06, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

Sorry 'bout that then, 'cause I first thought to call it "The Queen's English" but I wasn't sure if that was right either. --skie 05:34, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

The Queen's English is fine. I just always think British English makes it sound as if it's an imported or changed from a base language (not that it isn't a mish mash of various roots anyway...). It's not really, British or England's English, it's just English, and it's from here... Does that make any sense? Andrew 14:00, 25 May 2008 (PDT)

A bit, though both forms of English are spoken almost exactly the same, just the written spellings are different, which is what I find ironic. I can, however, say one plus, at least we are not using Shakespeare's English, or else few people would be able to easily understand this Wiki. skie 05:38, 27 May 2008 (PDT)

Amen to that Skie!!! And Hooray for 'U's! My friends always bug me when I use an English spelling--I'm from and live in Arkansas, so they think it's weird when I spell out 'colour' and not 'color'. Hahaha, what's really funny is that my Word program keeps telling me I've spelling it incorrectly.... Laurelhach 19:18, 24 September 2008 (PDT)

I've been wondering about spelling myself. I've been using the spellings I'm used to in Canada, which are pretty much what they use in Britain (with a few exceptions - we have jails and tires, not gaols and tyres). I didn't know how hard we were striving for consistency in this matter? Rose 06:35, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

You know, I think that if someone were reading an article here on the wiki, they wouldn't really notice subtle differences in spelling all that greatly--I know I don't. I mean, does anyone really pay attention to whether you spell it 'colour' or 'color'? Well, maybe, but I still don't think those kinds of spellings should be all that strictly regulated. -Laurelhach 15:07, 25 September 2008 (PDT)