ISA forces sub at endor

[Mike DiCenso]

Jeff's site utilizes a 2,000 meter Victory scaling, though where he got that, I don't know. I only know that some scalings and possibly offical word puts the Victory class at 2,990 meters. Even still, 2,000/20 = 100 meters for the bow section's height. So the beam being wider than the bow is tall, gives us still around 140 meters, multiply that by 3 gives us an asteroid of 300-460 meters. Still pretty big. But that's the absolute upper limit with that scaling. The 3,000 m scaling would up that quite a bit and then some given the variables.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Just a quick note, I corrected an error in my original scaling post. The asteroid should be 600-750 meters with a beam width of 200-250 meters which in turn is from working off of a nearly 3,000 m scaling for the Victory-class. Thus 216 kilotons would be the minimum energy requirement.
-Mike

[Trinoya]

I did some searching via my iphone and discovered that the 2,990.31 meters is a statement from Tim Earls, who was the Visual Effect director for crusade.

I also found a statement, however, in universe, which is Gideon stating the ship was one and one quarter miles.

Now, mind you, I utilized fuzzy screen caps off of youtube for my scaling earlier and couldnt' really get a good estimate one way or another, but I was scoring pretty close to that off of my loose ship comparisons, and I did get under Gideons statement..

I'd be willing to accept a 2000 meter Victory much more easily than a 3,000 meter victory, but I'm not beyond throwing my own calculatioins out the door in the face of a statement (be it in universe or from staff) so we are left with a question of which to accept, the statement of someone on the design team, or the in-universe statement.

So, before any of us can continue we need to determine which statement, Tim Earls or Gideons is the correct one. I shall embark upon that quest when I get home off of work.


On a pure side note: Take into account when scaling the beam that it thins after the initial discharge by a noticeable margin.

[Mike DiCenso]

I think you'll find that the scalings go either way since B5 and Crusade, like any other SF TV or movie series has it's fair share of FX gaffees, either intentional, or otherwise. Thus if you want to be really conservative with your estimates, you would go with the smaller scaling, rather than the larger one.

As for the width of the energy beam, look at the YouTube video I linked to, there is little signficant reduction from the size of it as compared to the bow section it is firing from, thus I would say that calculations I did are still quite reasonable.
-Mike

[Admiral Breetai]

It would make more sense if this was the super advanced vorlons/shadows from the series, possibly drawing reinforcements from other dimensions and timelines (since it would appear that this is at least somewhat within their power), but it is extremely ridiculous if they were YR level tech at this time.

they where YR level at the time and to add to it aside from the shadows walkers and The Tirad (loriens folks too) no one had working hyperspace capabilities

meaning the Vorlons and all the other species that didn't make it out of that war fought it entirely STL...for millions of years across a chunk of the galaxy constantly with out advancing technologically or anything

I agree with most EU. If it doesn't hurt the highest level cannon, or contradict it. (galaxy gun, palpatine using force meditation etc I would view as inconsistent with the universe/actions presented in the movies) On the other hand, I really don't see things like the inclusion of E-Wings or Badger Starfuries as being really inconsistent with the universe. For the purposes of vs debates though, EU stuff should probably be excluded unless otherwise mentioned. I would accept something like Stealth/Muskrat Starfuries for the purposes of this debate, but not Badgers, because they are outside of the primary material. If we were taking a 'high-consistency EU' kind of approach, I wouldn't mind stuff like Badgers and E-wings being included, but I don't think that stuff like the Sun Crusher or the aforementioned shadow-vorlon garbage unless we were taking an all-inclusive approach.

muskrat class star furies?

[

Yes, I am aware of how Ion weapons work in SW. I was just thinking that if SDs had Ion guns, like what we see on Hoth (although presumably on a smaller scale) we would have expected to see them used on the Tantive IV to disable it (as opposed to risking complete destruction by using turbolasers) likewise for when Vader is trying to capture the even more fragile Millennium falcon. The fact that we never see this would seem to be a point of inconsistency with the earlier claim that SDs are armed with them.

it's true they failed to use those weapons though that could of been idiocy more than anything but true good point

I would say that it is plausible that the empire has access to Ion weaponry, considering that the rebellion does, but the lack of ion use by imperials in the movies in situations where it would be recommended would seem to indicate that they are not in widespread use, or may be against doctrine, or may be used only for planetary defenses. I suppose that there may be an ion variant SD, considering we see about 4 different variants at the battle of Endor (default, SSD, comm ship, and a SD without a bottom hanger) but for the purposes of this debate, their possibility should probably be excluded.

well the only Ion based weapons we saw were planetary defense based ones so it maybe difficult for them

[User1555]

they where YR level at the time and to add to it aside from the shadows walkers and The Tirad (loriens folks too) no one had working hyperspace capabilities

meaning the Vorlons and all the other species that didn't make it out of that war fought it entirely STL...for millions of years across a chunk of the galaxy constantly with out advancing technologically or anything

That's right up there with Starkiller on the 'disregard established canon' scale of stupidity.

muskrat class star furies?

I was only able to find a single source that gave a name to the two seater variant from 'A Voice in the Wilderness' besides 'two seater variant', and that was the 'muskrat' starfury. Not sure about how canonicity though.

http://www.themadgoner.com/B5/B5Scrolls ... reen2_01_9

it's true they failed to use those weapons though that could of been idiocy more than anything but true good point

well the only Ion based weapons we saw were planetary defense based ones so it maybe difficult for them

I have heard people argue before that the only reason the Imperial forces were so incompetent in the movies was because of their commanders, and that the 'real' imperials from the EU are much more competent. A rubbish excuse if you ask me, considering these folks were working with Vader and the Emperor most of the time.

I would agree that planet-mounted Ion weapons probably makes the most sense, considering how big the Ion cannon the rebels used had to be to incapacitate the Star Destroyers.

[Mike DiCenso]

I would agree that planet-mounted Ion weapons probably makes the most sense, considering how big the Ion cannon the rebels used had to be to incapacitate the Star Destroyers.

None of this precludes the existance of SD-mounted ion cannons. It just may mean that an ion cannon big enough and with enough of a power source behind it to disable an ISD with a few shots has to be planet-bound.

Curiously enough, in the TCW Malevolence arc episodes, the Malevolence's ion cannons were enourmous as was the ship itself. However these weapons were capabe of disabling Venator SDs with just a single shot or two.
-Mike

[Admiral Breetai]

[
That's right up there with Starkiller on the 'disregard established canon' scale of stupidity.

EU portrays first ones as mind bogglingly stupid fucks that get absorbed into one thing and one thing only and take millions upon millions of years to advance..then suddenly become hyper awesome and flash copy their souls into space or some such nonsense

really it's very bad though the "hordes of shadow vessels warring with primitive first ones" was a nice read like you said it was massively stupid

I was only able to find a single source that gave a name to the two seater variant from 'A Voice in the Wilderness' besides 'two seater variant', and that was the 'muskrat' starfury. Not sure about how canonicity though.

http://www.themadgoner.com/B5/B5Scrolls ... reen2_01_9

i like the name

I have heard people argue before that the only reason the Imperial forces were so incompetent in the movies was because of their commanders, and that the 'real' imperials from the EU are much more competent. A rubbish excuse if you ask me, considering these folks were working with Vader and the Emperor most of the time.

seeing as the EU portrays the Galaxy as being lead almost exclusively people so stupid and idiotic they border on Cybertrolls and make timmy from south Park Look like Pompey or something

the epic raging idiocy of Palpatine and Luke the NJO as a whole and the alliance and the various grand Admirals to the extent as the guy who was regarded as second only to Thrawn saw the foolishness and was able to con his way into retirement on a luxury world after selling out to the rebs was hilarious and stupid

no seriously they have no argument the EU is packed full of near complete retards in command with very few exceptions

I would agree that planet-mounted Ion weapons probably makes the most sense, considering how big the Ion cannon the rebels used had to be to incapacitate the Star Destroyers.

the malevolence as well but then again tech did improve over those decades even if slowly

[Trinoya]

Well after a few days of searching I've not been able to find any evidence o the effect of which statement holds weight over the other.

I DID however do additional scaling from several more shots of the victory, which gave me a whopping 3,400 meters in one shot, and a pitiful 1300 meters in another. I did find scaling that works most consistently both with roughly 2,000 and 3,000 meters, and that appears to be the more common scaling (and that's because of reuse of digital shots and backgrounds, especially shots of the victory moving forward).

So... without any clear indication and two contradictory statements I'm just gonna leave it up to the OP ^_^ So, which is it, the 2000 meter or the 3,000 meter victory for the purposes of this thread?


On another note: I've been re-watching season three and four to get more information on the capabilities of the thunderbolts and the starfuries in general. The later showings are much more superior to the earlier showings (seasons 1 and 2) and naturally that is owed to the increased budget... I didn't find anything to contradict these capabilities (that is to say, no situation where it would have really mattered in a substantial way)... I still think large numbers will be required to overwhelm the star destroyers but I'm willing to reconsider the position to some degree (just from my own searching no less).


To that end: With the most conservative estimates available for the endor side as I placed before, I would say it's not impossible for the B5 forces to win (if a bit impractical). As the OP has stated that this is a 'to the death' vs (at least for the part of the B5 forces) and with those numbers I believe that a likely out come is heavy casualties for the B5 side, and the Executor forced to retreat to save the Emperor and Vader, with most of the star destroyers, the shield generator, and the death star destroyed.


However; I would like to point out that this was a conservative estimate (nothing wrong with that of course) and that on most of the other boards in these debates this would have never been gotten into to this degree, the idea of 31 SDs at endor would be, to some, laughable (and I didn't even include the communications ship), and more so the idea of B5 standing a chance against the shielded ships in the first place.

For reference sake though:

The general B5 fighter craft are, pound for pound superior to their imperial counterparts in every category except acceleration/deceleration capabilities (linear acceleration that is).

The armor disparity between human vessels in B5 to imperial vessels is not substantive, but I would still maintain a strong argument that this is for human vessels (and they still have a massive glaring weakness in those gaping fighter bays).

As I reference earlier, B5 ground forces have armor capable of withstanding substantive strikes from foreign alien weapons, this indicates both impressive armor capabilities, as well as impressive armor penetration capabilities for that universe. We already know that the most common ground weapons can generate kinetic force, and I propose that that kinetic force is a method of penetration.

And we all know how well storm trooper armor deals with kinetics. ^_-

So, in short, there is a chance, albeit a questionable one based on the numbers, for total victory IF they are willing to take the casualties.

[Mike DiCenso]

Well after a few days of searching I've not been able to find any evidence o the effect of which statement holds weight over the other.

I DID however do additional scaling from several more shots of the victory, which gave me a whopping 3,400 meters in one shot, and a pitiful 1300 meters in another. I did find scaling that works most consistently both with roughly 2,000 and 3,000 meters, and that appears to be the more common scaling (and that's because of reuse of digital shots and backgrounds, especially shots of the victory moving forward).

So... without any clear indication and two contradictory statements I'm just gonna leave it up to the OP ^_^ So, which is it, the 2000 meter or the 3,000 meter victory for the purposes of this thread?

That's pretty much about what I'd expected it to be. Conversely, if you average the lengths, you get around 2,100 meters. Let's call it 2,500 meters for an in-between estimate, and then go from there with all the calcs.
-Mike

[Admiral Breetai]

Well after a few days of searching I've not been able to find any evidence o the effect of which statement holds weight over the other.

damn that's dedication

So... without any clear indication and two contradictory statements I'm just gonna leave it up to the OP ^_^ So, which is it, the 2000 meter or the 3,000 meter victory for the purposes of this thread?

i could barely honestly so use what ever figure you feel makes more sense

However; I would like to point out that this was a conservative estimate (nothing wrong with that of course) and that on most of the other boards in these debates this would have never been gotten into to this degree, the idea of 31 SDs at endor would be, to some, laughable (and I didn't even include the communications ship), and more so the idea of B5 standing a chance against the shielded ships in the first place.

I'd love to know why they react that way seeing as the films show between twelve and thirty ISD's and no more and it's one of the largest fleets shown in the primary canon

For reference sake though:

The general B5 fighter craft are, pound for pound superior to their imperial counterparts in every category except acceleration/deceleration capabilities (linear acceleration that is).

agreed

The armor disparity between human vessels in B5 to imperial vessels is not substantive, but I would still maintain a strong argument that this is for human vessels (and they still have a massive glaring weakness in those gaping fighter bays).

to be fair they have a severe edge in terms of damage soak Victories especially they can keep functioning after loosing between thirty to fifty percent of the ship itself which is impressive

ISD's are probably tougher by a good deal though

As I reference earlier, B5 ground forces have armor capable of withstanding substantive strikes from foreign alien weapons, this indicates both impressive armor capabilities, as well as impressive armor penetration capabilities for that universe. We already know that the most common ground weapons can generate kinetic force, and I propose that that kinetic force is a method of penetration.

I need to rewatch the series i forgot all this