Talk:Spathi

Evil Ones
Were the Evil Ones really harmless to the Spathi? They certainly are to us, but some conversations in the game (according to the Spathi, they ran from continent to continent in their world, and only developed space flight because that was not enough, and they talk a lot about how they were eaten in large numbers - in the past tense), in addition to the fact that it was the Umgah who put the EO there, leads me to believe that the EO actually ate mollusks like the Spathi... Dehumanizer 07:33, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I think it was a rather central point about the Evil Ones that, while they may have harmed a few Spathi (as they did kill crew members if your lander wasn't upgraded and you ran over them), the Spathi were greatly exaggerating the harm caused them. Also note that they were completely still. I don't remember that the Umgah had put them there, though. As for spaceflight, I was under the (probably mistaken) impression that the rise of the Evil Ones was a relatively more recent occurence, and that the Spathi got spaceflight in response to other creatures. Not sure if this really makes any sense. Andre 08:53, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I have specifically said that some of the fans BELIEVE that it were the Umgah. There is no indication in the game about the source of the Evil Ones. I am rather confident that the Spathi have indeed suffered bad losses to them. The Evil Ones are sessile (they don't move) but the Melnorme comments on it, saying something to the effect of "Don't be afraid, human flesh doesn't appeal to them the way Spathi flesh does". When Lander actually comes in touch with the Evil Ones, they are extermely deadly, rivaling the most voracious predators in the game (aside, of course, the VUX Beast). Please note that when asked about the Spathi History, the Safe Ones specifically say that they lived happily in their ignorance until the Evil Ones arrived. Hope that this has answered your doubts. Rogue, 08:40PM, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

BUTT (weapon 2) expansion
Backward-Utilized Tracking Torpedo? (and it did indeed track!) or, Backward-Utilized Thrusting Torpedo? (as it was in the manual?)

I'm sorry to submit a sticky wicket, but revisionist history has sanitized the submissive Spathi a smidge.

later2besigned —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.214.108.212 (talk) 07:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Backwards-Utilized Tracking Torpedo. I'm pretty damn sure about it though for some reason I cannot recall WHERE it was stated. the use of "thrusting" would not make sense in this acronym

And yeah, they track. not very well but they do. --Moonshadow Rogue (talk) 00:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Spathi.png
Image:Spathi.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)