Captain talk:Kradik

Interesting character
Hi Zilla. I know we haven't seen well eye-to-eye in the past. But after discovering this guy I have to say I am impressed with him so far. His monstrous form has an interesting and memorable design from combining the Bygorian model with a few traits from other monsters. That scene with him and Caligustus talking together I'd say is quite a memorable; two titans talking amongst the buildings of more normal-sized people. And ai would love to see the dialogue they had. Makes me wonder if I should loosen up and experiment with that sometime ( is pretty big but not this big. I probably never considered this idea as you're a far bigger Gojira and Metroidvania buff than I am).

While I do like Kradik, I have a few thoughts about certain aspects of him if you are open to them. I don't want to destroy the character, he's good so far but here is what I am thinking anyway.
 * Probably the biggest thing I noticed was you mentioning he can withstand several nuclear blasts at close range. Word of caution on that as nuclear devices aren't uniform in their destructive power. For instance the Russian Tsar Bomba, with a blast yield of ~54 megatonnes of TNT is more than 2300x more devastating than the Fat Man. Even less goliath warheads like Castle Bravo (15MT, 714x more powerful than Fat Man) are still in the range of several megatonnes of TNT.  I mainly mention this because I understand Godzilla was awakened by nukes and I'm using Fat Man as a benchmark because I think that was possibly that kind of bomb that probably originally woke him up. Anyway, perhaps make it clearer what kind of impacts he can withstand? ANother thing to consider might be that advanced Sporewiki civs are probably delivering these kinds of payloads via hypervelocity projectiles rather than nuclear material. Although by "close range" I'm guessing you mean to say sevrel hundred metres to a kilkometre away?
 * For his skin, while superhard skin is nice, its not the only way to portray invincibility. Rigid surfaces are good at deflecting and withstanding small-to-medium level impacts but what it is not good at is absorbing the shock. Cars built on the rigidity philosophy (common for models made between the turn of the century and the 1950s) were more likely to kill their occupants in collisions than today's cars because the shock reverberated though the frame and there was no buffer time to allow passengers bodies to adjust ot the sudden change in motion. Its a suggestion but perhaps his scales mirror crumple zones in cars? With the added factor of reforming to their original shape after impact. Or maybe the scales deform rather than crumple to absor bthe impact, again, reforming afterward. It might also help with surviving the blast wave of an atopmic bomb.
 * I would say the use of either force or stealth in a battleplan depends on the situation. Both are situational and I don't think there's need for a "despite this" point. He can still be a tactical genius and favour shock and awe in his strategies; It's primarily a matter of how he utilisies brute force.
 * Being an accomplished weapon designer, starship designer, arhitect and tactician all at once isn't as easy as it sounds as the ocmbination requires knowledge in a multitude of sceintific fields including several branches of physics, engineering, chemistry, mathematics, social dynamics, pattern recognition, materials sciences, logistics and psychology. Most modern weapons today are the product of entire teams of researchers and analysts and to become a decent architect requires several years of study on the umbrella subject alone and a decade or so of practice. Simply-put, as science and society advances and the amount of knowledge knowledge increases, it becomes more and more difficult for a single person to have an accomplisment portfolio comparable to what Leonardo da Vinci managed in his 70 years of life.  Although It could be entirely possible that he could take the credit for the advancements or was the man behind the establishment of think-tanks that led to all these designs.
 * I warn that self-declared nicknames and titles carry an immediate air of arrogance about the person as it can indicate they have an inflated view of themselves. If this is what you intended, I suggest making a note on his general sense of personal pride. If you didn't intend for the title to carry an air of arrogence, perhaps change how he got it to something like earning the title as a battlefield accomplishment or a moniker that Zarbanian soldiers gave him? Self-proclaimed titles are bad, but there is nothing too wrong with calling yourself by the titles given to you by others.
 * Minor notes in spelling, I know what you mean but try "shudder" instead of "shutter".

My point overall is good work on him so far but I'm sure there is still room for improvement. --Monet47 - "Immortality is an elusive thing" 10:21, September 28, 2014 (UTC)