Starfleet Jedi

I come across a link to this site will lurking around SB.net, looks like a good place here.

Mostly I'm into the vs. debates, SW, ST, Halo, and a few other things.
I used to believe in the ICS, but finally got the kick in the ass that made me see it in the right light.

Will, see you all around!

Hello Frezia, welcome to SFJ.

What was the kick in the butt that the ICS received, if I may be so bold?

What was the kick in the butt that the ICS received, if I may be so bold?

Just the combined weight of the movies and most of the EU.

I was going over my vast archive of books, saving the interesting bits I found to my computer and when I went over it, to much of it went against ICS yields like the insane 30 Petaton guns on a CIS frigate that melted an ice moon and such.

One of the two main things was the battle in the RoTS novel which gives us a low end of about 10MT after days of fighting.
But even after days of fighting those ships should have still been throwing around more then that, say 50-100 MT instead of TL bolts "powerful enough to vaporize a small town".

Then the BDZ that was going to be done in The Hutt Gambit, seven Cap ships, outdated though they were, should have done more damage then what the book says was going to be done.

There are EU books that go along with ICS even before it came out, but going over everything like a battle between Cap ships in atmosphere in that new TCWS show is just against ICS. After all, GT range weapons and troops running around on the ground don't go well together.

Only problem is I'm going have to do all my research over again since my old Computer burned out and took it to PC heaven with it.

And alomst forgot: where the hell do they store trillions of tons of Hypermatter when they have to burn 40,000 tons per-second. I feel like such an idiot for ever believing that ICS book.

Welcome to the forum. I hope you enjoy your time here. I'am sure you've visited Robert Scott Anderson's website ST-v-SW.Net. Agree or disagree with his conclusions, his site is a treasure trove of information that the SW Talifans don't want you to see. Check out the Obsidian Order Project to read some of the more embarassing EU material that Wong and Saxton would rather you forget! Robert's NoLettersHome page is also great for seeing just how much the TCW series completely disagrees with the ICS.
-Mike

Frezia wrote:And alomst forgot: where the hell do they store trillions of tons of Hypermatter when they have to burn 40,000 tons per-second. I feel like such an idiot for ever believing that ICS book.

They'd need TARDIS tech, an unspoken of hyperspace thing or go with the WEG version.

Hello!

May I ask, what is SB.net? Is it a slip on SB.com? :)

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Hello!

May I ask, what is SB.net? Is it a slip on SB.com? :)

Yes, SB.com.
In fact, it was one of the links you posted in that BDZ thread that brought me here.

What links were those, if you don't mind my asking?
-Mike

The links were to "Base Delta Zero", "Are the ICS books accurate?" and "List of expanded universe source incompatible with ICS" in the thread "Speed of BDZ" on SB.

Ah, cool. Thanks. I take it the reactions from... certain people... were not very receptive to those links? ;-)
-Mike

It actually went totally smoothly. Point being that I didn't give a flying F if people were pissed off or not. The question was asked, I merely pointed to threads, both at SBC and SFJN that answered it in the best possible way.
If people wanted to post links to SDN, I let that to others, but no one bothered.
My main concern was that convenient rule about "the affairs of other boards do not concern us", pulled out when it suits, generally ignored when linking to SDN's Warhammer 40000 threads for example.

Could either of you provide links to the "Speed of BDZ" thread, please. It's a rare treat to see an SB.com thread where people actually act somewhat reasonable.
-Mike

Thanks for the link back to SB.com. Unfortunately it seems that there were some attempts to derail the thread there, and most especially in others I followed links to.
-Mike

Sure, it happened here and there, but fortunately, in general, all topics were adequately addressed and documented before people lost focus.

Were there threads you wish had been explored... deeper?