Validity of the ICS

[Mr. Oragahn]

Please fucking update your knowledge.

Any dumbfuck twit who looks at the movie sees that 100% of bolts don't move at lightspeed

As far as I'm concerned, I wrote the two above.
The first one is not an insult.
The second is not an insult either, and not directed at anyone.

A good question would be how Saxton knows it?

People see how much energy is needed to shatter asteroids of x meters, when hit by a disc of some sort, which the edge is the cutting system here.
Then they figure out, based on range and perimeter, how much energy the asteroid, at this distance, must have been hit with, compared to the total power. To do so, they compare the size of the asteroid, say the 100 m one, to perimeter at that distance.
They obtain a percentage of the total energy.

Then, by combining the shattering energy and the percentage, they obtain the figures.

Example 1 & 2 were provided on page 6. Both agree on one point: it's barely reaching the megaton range, from what we can estimate with what we see.
Allow one order of magnitude extra, for the fun, and you still fall incredibly short of Saxton's claim that is between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher.

It is by far the best quick and reliable methods I've seen thus far, and no one claiming that the ICS were right provided anything better.

These are all lower limits. As you said based on only what we see: a 100m asteroid being shattered. How far away from the center of explosion was it? How much further did the shockwave move before disappearing?

The first calc starts on the assumption that the asteroid was 2 km away from the point of explosion.
The second one starts with the assumption of a distance from point of explosion about 2.4 km.

Besides, there's the simple fact that even massive starships can't seem able to dispatch that amount of power in single salvos, with massive power cores to back them up.
It's illogical that a mini bomb could have 12 GT worth of punch.

For more details, let's see... I'm opening a new thread.

Try to understand that you cannot contradict the numbers from ICS by using LOWER LIMITS obtained from the films. When he wrote the ICS Saxton was a writer working for Lucas and was authorised to expand upon the Star Wars universe. He doesn't need to show any calculations just like various EU authors don't need to justify their plot points before the readers accept them. All that matters is that they don't directly contradict the films. Seeing as how films showed an entire planet being blown up and previous EU sources mention planets being sterilized by Star Destroyers 12Gt seismic mine is hardly anything new.

Oh no, it's not that simple. People have said countless times that the ICS numbers were right.
Accepting the numbers because they come from the ICS, is one thing. Which I have gripes against considering that I'm always suspicious of EU claims.

But claiming that the numbers are correct because Saxton knows what he's talking about, then I ask to see the proof that he knew what he talked about. That is, his calcs.

I already said there is a thread where you can directly talk about the geonosian fighter & LAAT issue.

I don't have a copy of ICS so could you tell me what numbers does ICS give for those two craft?

You don't need the exact figures. It is said that the LAATs are shielded.

Now think about it. If those things carry shields, they're ought to match, at least, the power of those mounted on fighters or bombers, right?
There are allthose post 2002 claims that fighters have kiloton lasers, at least. And so shields are.

However, in this thread, we show that such shields can't be so powerful.

Why do all their stories involve fusion cores and no annhilation cores?
Answer this with direct logic, or concede.

What exactly does this, if true, prove? They don't mention annihilation reactors so what?

They don't exist.

Provide calcs, in a separate thread if possible.

The calculation was provided a decade ago. That you still refuse to accept them calling upon some kind of "chain reaction" which you can't explain but are ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE it decreases Death Star's power requirement significantly is quite frankly your problem.
What is funny is how you turn the scientific method on the head. You search for text snippets mentioning fusion then turn around and say "aha it is fusion therefore Death Star cannot be as powerful never mind the demonstration".

Sigh.
It is not the calculation that is in problem, as far as the Death Star is concerned. You understand that maths can be correct, even if they're off topic, irrelevant, and based on a flawed premise, right?
It's like saying there were two groups of three persons each, and the people on your side would say then that 2 x 40,000,000 = 80,000,000 persons. The math's good, but relies on wrong premises.

"4-figure G" means what?
You're sure you didn't mean "4 digits G figures" instead?

And provide calcs.

Dookus escape from Geonosis, Endor approach.

As I said, calcs please.

That theory is insanely stupid in terms of military science.
It's ashaming that Saxton would so strongly believe in it.

Are spinning photons more ridiculous that Death Star magically blowing up a planet without providing any power?

Sheesh. The first, military wise, is stupid. The second is about a non fully explained mechanical feature. I can't believe you're mixing both.

At least Saxton gives some explanation as to the mechanism.

Yes he does. Doesn't make it sensical anytime, military wise.

If you wish, you can reply to this question as well:

What's better between an invisible direct beam that travels at c, and a beam that's slowed down to a poor fraction of c, to allow a visible tracer make the beam's origin and destination obvious?

The second option, which is completely stupid anyway, would only start to make a shred of sense if the gunmen could only rely on sheer sight to aim at their target.

What do you do other than wishing it to be so? And do you have a better theory for green and red lines called turbolasers? If you not then where do you get off calling Saxton's theory stupid?

Not having an explanation doesn't mean we have to accept a stupid one.

So you concede that lightspeed turbolasers do appear in EU but then dismiss it as being written by "some enthusiasts"? Just who the hell do you think you are?

I consider that these beams, if they exist - I can't check every single bit of EU - are in contradiction with the films.
The worst part is that Saxton tries to plaster his fancy theory on every single beam weapon seen in SW. THAT is a problem.

We're talking about the YV ships which, at that time of the war, were ripping new holes to both major factions in the galaxy, the Republic and the Empire remnants.

I like how you always take the evidence you like and then pretend that all other are inferior. The ROTS CANON novelization itself mentions ships firing at each other from light minutes I believe.

I was only providing an example from the EU, to show that contrary to typical biased SDN belief, not all the EU thinks SW weapons range in lightminutes and travel at c, and that if enemies who can't shoot down cargo ships 5 km away, can still be a menace to all forces in the SW galaxy, we clearly have a good indication of how good the aiming range of the opposed forces must be as well.

Secondly how big and maneuverable are those small freighters. You do realize that range is not a simple number right? It depends on the target: it's cross sectional area and maneuverability.

Yes, I know, and that's precisely why I said that the greater ranges (hundreds of kms) are only good against bigger ships.

However, this is amusing coming from one who thinks beams travel at c.

I'm tired of that bullshit. How can you honestly pretend that the head of a beam will travel at c towards its target?

Please, for the sake of those little catgirls, provide the evidence that we apparently have all missed.

[Trinoya]

Kane, let us assume (that is to say, regardless of any debate on the topic) that the figures posted in the ICS are correct...

All I'm asking for is why did the following not occur:

Grevious, or for that matter any captain in the opening space battle in ROTS on the side of the separatists, not opening fire with more powerful shots, or blatantly question any order not to (the republic obviously didn't want to endanger old Palpy.)

The Gungan army not being obliterated on its way to fight the battledroid army. It obviously had no shield up at the time, the area had no strategic value for the trade federation, and any ship in the blockade could have easily ended it.

The apparent low yields observed at Endor.

The lack of even low kiloton yields demonstrated at any point in the battle with the republic army at genosis. The vast majority of the Separatists army is comprised of droids and the Separatists should have no problem obliterating a few thousand that will ultimately be lost regardless. The blast effects from say, 3 kilotons, would easily decimate the republic army with very little negative effect over all to the battlefield.

The Death Star not opening fire at a vast distance on the fighters approaching it from Yavin, when such yields would certainly engulf the tight formation, and opening fire that early on would certainly make it much more difficult for the fighters to approach.

General Veers apparent lack of repeated kiloton level firepower during the battle at Hoth (this isn't to say blasts even reaching that of Hiroshima, but more akin to a tactical nuclear bomb).

Why any government would allow, even in hard to police areas, bounty hunters to roam with gigaton level firepower.

Why the displayed effects of the vast majority of fighter craft against supposedly shielded targets appear to have discernible and apparent negative effects when these ships should be all but immune to fighter attack.

Why fighters are even used when anyone can slug 200 gigaton blasts around but their fighters can not. For that matter, why any ship would feel even remotely threatened by said fighters.

The fact that these low end effects (in comparison to the number in ICS) seen in the movie are how Saxton apparently justifies high end yields in the book.

No one is arguing directly for low firepower here, in fact, there is a lot of the movies to support impressive firepower over all, but the ICS is challenged heavily by much of the expanded universe and has no direct support in the movies. It contradicts a large number of books, it contradicts the use of fighters, and ultimately it is contradicted by all manner of observed physics in battle in regards to armor. Heck, random munitions are able to break through the hull of a ship in ROTS, and a decidedly kiloton broadside completely obliterates one all together (and I only say kiloton because apparently enough was destroyed to allow Obi-Wan and Anakin to fly through it).

A final open question: Where are people getting the entire, "ICS overrides the rest of the EU?" stuff... I thought only Reynolds (my 6282342nd uncle removed :P ), had any 'magic' canonization of his materials, and that was in serious doubt.

[Praeothmin]

Kane Starkiller wrote:

So you concede that lightspeed turbolasers do appear in EU but then dismiss it as being written by "some enthusiasts"? Just who the hell do you think you are?

So I take it then that you also accept the EU "Flack" bursts, and the weak firepower on an SSD (all in the EU), as well as the Turbolasers using Tibanna gas?

You see Kane, you're accusing Oraghan of doing what many Pro-Wars debaters have been doing for a long time.

Many Pro-Wars dabaters refuse the notion of Flack-Bursts, yet the ANH novel states Turbolasers do make them.

You have many EU example of very slow Hyperdrives, yet all are ignored when discussing Hyperdrive speed compared to Warp drive.

That fact is, the EU is all over the place in terms of firepower examples, so if you want to use it and acknoledge what is said, then you have to acknowledge all of it (yes, even Kevin J Anderson's novels), not just the part you like most.

[Who is like God arbour]

Kane Starkiller

• • Mas Ramdar had sustained so much damage already that it was little more than a target to absorb the Hand's return fire, and Indomitable was only a shell, most of its crew dead or evacuated, being run remotely by its commander and bridge crew.

• ...it was little more than a target to absorb the Hand's return fire...
  
  
  ...only a shell, most of its crew dead...

If the ships were that heavy damaged then only because they weren't protected by their shields anymore. Otherwise the shields would have prevented that damage as it is supposed to do.

Or shall we assume that Star Wars shields aren't capable to sufficiently protect their ships so that the crew of such a ship can already be dead and the ship a shell while the shields are still up?

• • I know that destructive energy can bleed through the shields. But not in an extent that the ship is already a hulk, the crew dead - but the shields are still up.

That doesn't really makes sense, does it?

[Who is like God arbour]

@ WILGA

I don't think the plating that Grievous' foot crushed was armour at all, but just decorative stuff. Well, yes, it's kinda stupid of put that grey "decorative" stuff on the hull of a ship that is going to be horribly grey anyway, but I doubt the armour will only be about one thumb thick.

I admit that it look silly if that would be the armour.

But why should someone put slates above the armour of a warship?

And even if that would be only a decorative slate, another argument was still not adressed:

• • • How can it be that an armour that is allegedly able to withstand the energy of several ten-thousands atomic bombs (200 gigatons would be equal to 48'000 ZAR atomic bombs or a TNT volume of 142 billion m³ and weight of about 235 quadrillion kilogram.) is affected so much only by aerodynamic heating?
      
      At the re-entry of space capsules in the atmosphere were temperatures at the surface up to 2'400 degree Celsius measured. At the expolsion of hydrogen bombs temperatures are created from 200 to 300 million degree Celsius (that is much hotter than the core of the sun).
      
      The re-entry shouldn't have affected the hull of the Invisible Hand at all, if it would be able to withstand only one single atomic bomb.

The shields of the Invisible Hand have failed and it was fired on it.

And nowhere in the movie or novelization was stated that they have dialed down their weapons fire while shooting on the Invisible Hand.

Quite the contrary:

• • • "Sir?" The thin voice of the comm officer interrupted Grievous's pacing. "We are being hailed by Integrity, sir. They propose a cease-fire."
      Dark yellow eyes squinted through the skull-mask at the tactical displays. A pause in the combat would allow Invisible Hand's turbolaser batteries to cool, and give the engineers a chance to get the gravity generators under control. "Acknowledge receipt of transmission. Stand by to cease fire."
      "Standing by, sir." The gunnery officer was still shaking.
      "Cease fire."
      The lances of energy that had joined the Hand to the Home Fleet Strike Force melted away.
      "Further transmission, sir. It's Integrity's commander."
      Grievous nodded. "Initiate."
      A ghostly image built itself above the bridge's ship-to-ship hologenerator: a young human male of distinctly average height and build, wearing the uniform of a lieutenant commander. The only thing distinctive about his otherwise rather bland features was the calm confidence in his eyes.
      "General Grievous," the young man said briskly, "I am Lieutenant Commander Lorth Needa of RSS Integrity. At my request, my superiors have consented to offer you the chance to surrender
      your ship, sir.''
      "Surrender?" Grievous's vocabulator produced a very credable reproduction of a snort. "Preposterous."
      "Please give this offer careful deliberation, General, as it will not be repeated. Consider the lives of your crew."
      Grievous cast an icy glance around his bridge full of craven Neimoidians. "Why should I?"
      The young man did not look surprised, though he did show L trace of sadness. "Is this your reply, then?"
      "Not at all." Grievous drew himself up; by straightening the angles of his levered joints, he could add half a meter to his already imposing height. "I have a counteroffer. Maintain your ease-fire, move that hulk Indomitable out of my way, and withdraw to a minimum range of fifty kilometers until this ship achieves hyperspace jump."
      "If I may use your word, sir: preposterous." "Tell these superiors of yours that if my demands are not met within ten minutes, I will personally disembowel Supreme Chancellor Palpatine, live on the HoloNet. Am I understood?"
      The young officer took this without a blink. "Ah. The Chancellor is aboard your ship, then."
      "He is. Your pathetic Jedi so-called heroes have failed. They are dead, and Palpatine remains in my hands."
      "Ah," the young officer repeated. "So you will, of course, allow me to speak with him. To, ah, reassure my superiors that you - are not simply - well, to put it charitably bluffing?"
      "I would not lower myself to lie to the likes of you." Grievous turned to the comm officer. "Patch in Count Dooku."
      The comm officer stroked his screen, then shook his head "He's not responding, sir."
      Grievous shook his head disgustedly. "Just show the Chancellor, then. Bring up my quarters on the security screen."
      The security officer stroked his own screen, and made a choking sound. "Hrm, sir?"
      "What are you waiting for? Bring it up!"
      He'd gone as pink as the gunner. "Perhaps you should have a look first, sir?"
      The plain urgency in his tone brought Grievous to his side without another word. The general bent over the screen that showed the view inside his quarters and found himself looking at jumbled piles of energy-sheared wreckage surrounding the empty shape of the General's Chair.
      And that - that there - that looked like it could have been a body...
      Draped in a cape of armorweave.
      Grievous turned back toward the intership holocomm. "The Chancellor is - indisposed."
      "Ah. I see."
      Grievous suspected that the young officer saw entirely too well. "I assure you -"
      "I do not require your assurance, General. You have the same amount of time you offered us. Ten minutes from now, I will have either your surrender, or confirmation that Supreme Chancellor Palpatine is alive, unharmed - and present - or Invisible Hand will be destroyed."
      "Wait - you can't simply -"
      "Ten minutes, General. Needa out."

Needa hasn't believed that the Chancellor was still alive.

• • • Then the ship bucked, sharper than it ever had, and the view wall panels whited out as radiation - scatter sleeted through the bridge. Alarm klaxons blared. The nav console flared sparks into the face of a Neimoidian pilot, setting his uniform on fire and adding his screams to the din, and another console exploded, ripping the newly promoted senior gunnery officer into a pile of shredded meat.
      Ah, Grievous thought. In all the excitement, he had entirely forgotten about Lieutenant Commander Needa and Integrity.
      The other pilot - the one who wasn't shrieking and slapping at the flames on his uniform until his own hands caught fire - leaned as far away from his screaming partner as his crash webbing would allow and shouted, "General, that shot destroyed the last of the aft control cells! The ship is deorbiting! We're going to burn!"
      "Very well," Grievous said calmly. "Stay on course." Now it no longer mattered whether his bodyguards could overpower the Jedi or not: they would all burn together.

The ultimatum was over and the fire on the Invisible Hand was opened again - with the goal to destroy it.

• • • The cruiser bounced even harder, and its attitude began to skew as a new klaxon joined the blare of the other alarms. "That wasn't me!" Anakin jerked his hands away from the board. "I haven't even done anything yet!"
      "It certainly wasn't." Palpatine's voice was unnaturally calm. "It seems someone is shooting at us."
      "Wonderful," Anakin muttered. "Could this day get any better?"
      "Perhaps we can talk with them." Obi-Wan moved over to the comm station and began working the screen. "Let them know we've captured the ship."
      "All right, take the comm,"

Only therafter has Needa learnt that the Chancellor is still alive and the ship was captured.

There is no indication and no plausible reason why they should have dialed down their weapons power.

[Jedi Master Spock]

WILGA, thank you for the unusually detailed quotation. That proves helpful to me in several ways.

Please fucking update your knowledge.

Any dumbfuck twit who looks at the movie sees that 100% of bolts don't move at lightspeed

As far as I'm concerned, I wrote the two above.
The first one is not an insult.
The second is not an insult either, and not directed at anyone.

They are at a minimum not particularly polite, nor conducive to polite discussion.

[Mr. Oragahn]

WILGA, thank you for the unusually detailed quotation. That proves helpful to me in several ways.

Please fucking update your knowledge.

Any dumbfuck twit who looks at the movie sees that 100% of bolts don't move at lightspeed

As far as I'm concerned, I wrote the two above.
The first one is not an insult.
The second is not an insult either, and not directed at anyone.

They are at a minimum not particularly polite, nor conducive to polite discussion.

Fair, I'll try to avoid this.

[Who is like God arbour]

I have sended Kane Starkiller and Batman a private message to remind them that we are not finished here.

• We are not finished at
  

  • • Validity of the ICS

  I have bothered to give you an specific example in the movies that contradict the ICS.
  
  That was what you have demanded again and again.
  
  Please either concede that the ICS is rubbish or rebut my example.
  

  • • • But please consider also the supplementary statements I have made to answer Kane Stars objection.
        
        And please remember: Your answer should be - at least - plausible and to a certain degree obviously. Don't forge an explanation which would retcon the whole plot of both episodes. Important facts which are relevant to the understanding of the plot would have been mentioned either in the movies or in the novelizations.

  We are not finished at
  

  • • Validity of the ICS

  I have bothered to answer your objection to my statements.
  
  Please either concede or rebut it.

I hope that they either formally concede or continue this debate.

But it would already be enough if they formally say it if they don't intend to continue this debate and give a reason for this decision.





Otherwise - after a certain time lapse in which they should have answered - I have to assume either

• that they are too proud to concede or
• that they are simply impolite that they - although they have voluntarily engaged in this debate - do not finish it and ignore furthermore a direct request to avow themself.

Although the first and the second option aren't mutually exclusive.

I mean, I know that Batman is posting on SDN and Kane Starkiller has posted here. Therefore I see no reason to assume that they have a good reason why they don't continue this debate. And it wouldn't be the first time that Batman begins or joins a debate and then doesn't continue or finish it and nobody knows what's up.





After all - at least I think so - that is an important debate because it concerns the core of most of the arguments in the Star Trek versus Star Warsdebate:

• • • What validity has the "Attack of the Clones: Incredible Cross-Sections"

If it is proven once and for all that the "Attack of the Clones: Incredible Cross-Sections" is not accurate, the debate can return to a plausible level.

After all, nobody who has only seen the Star Wars movies would be able to reconcile the figures the "Attack of the Clones: Incredible Cross-Sections" is giving and the movies.

[Kane Starkiller]

The first calc starts on the assumption that the asteroid was 2 km away from the point of explosion.
The second one starts with the assumption of a distance from point of explosion about 2.4 km.

Besides, there's the simple fact that even massive starships can't seem able to dispatch that amount of power in single salvos, with massive power cores to back them up.
It's illogical that a mini bomb could have 12 GT worth of punch.

For more details, let's see... I'm opening a new thread.

I've seen the other thread and it doesn't change the fact that all you can make out is a lower limit. As for starships EU describes them as blowing off planetary atmosphere so yes they do have such firepower. As does Death Star which I will answer below.

Oh no, it's not that simple. People have said countless times that the ICS numbers were right.
Accepting the numbers because they come from the ICS, is one thing. Which I have gripes against considering that I'm always suspicious of EU claims.

But claiming that the numbers are correct because Saxton knows what he's talking about, then I ask to see the proof that he knew what he talked about. That is, his calcs.

The thread is validity of ICS no? That's all I'm interested in.

You don't need the exact figures. It is said that the LAATs are shielded.

Now think about it. If those things carry shields, they're ought to match, at least, the power of those mounted on fighters or bombers, right?
There are allthose post 2002 claims that fighters have kiloton lasers, at least. And so shields are.
However, in this thread, we show that such shields can't be so powerful.

In other words ICS doesn't make any statements regarding those two vehicles therefore their displayed firepower and shielding in films cannot contradict ICS. There is no reason to believe an atmospheric troop transport must have the same reactor class as fighters which are expected to engage even capital ships.

What exactly does this, if true, prove? They don't mention annihilation reactors so what?

They don't exist.

Ever heard of the phrase absence of proof is not proof of absence? We know they must have more powerful reactors from the feats we've seen them accomplish.

Sigh.
It is not the calculation that is in problem, as far as the Death Star is concerned. You understand that maths can be correct, even if they're off topic, irrelevant, and based on a flawed premise, right?
It's like saying there were two groups of three persons each, and the people on your side would say then that 2 x 40,000,000 = 80,000,000 persons. The math's good, but relies on wrong premises.

You have shown zero proof or reasoning as to why we should assume Death Star didn't require the neccesary power to blow up the planet. No one has suggested a working alternative. Not to mention various quotes from EU all of which describe superlaser as raw power and Inside the Worlds even states Death Star power generation is equal to hundred of supergiant stars I believe.

Dookus escape from Geonosis, Endor approach.

As I said, calcs please.

I already covered it several times on this forum. Dooku flies from ground to beyond Geonosis' rings (10,000km) in the time it takes Amidala to run 10 meters and Yoda to pick up his cane. In Endor approach the planet visibly grows as the fleet approaches it. That's speed on the order of 100km/s with a breaking room of about 100,000km.

Sheesh. The first, military wise, is stupid. The second is about a non fully explained mechanical feature. I can't believe you're mixing both.

"A non fully explained mechanical feature"? You haven't explained ANYTHING other than of course it must be much weaker than 10^38J. Of that you are absolutely sure. By all means explain how it's "military wise" stupid.

Yes he does. Doesn't make it sensical anytime, military wise.

If you wish, you can reply to this question as well:

What's better between an invisible direct beam that travels at c, and a beam that's slowed down to a poor fraction of c, to allow a visible tracer make the beam's origin and destination obvious?

The second option, which is completely stupid anyway, would only start to make a shred of sense if the gunmen could only rely on sheer sight to aim at their target.

The tracer is a byproduct of the turbolaser not something gunners can turn on and off. Secondly it is possible that turbolaser technology allows the SW civilization to achieve greater firepower than with ordinary lasers so they are used instead.

Not having an explanation doesn't mean we have to accept a stupid one.

If the explanation is give by an official source then yes you have. Unless you can find direct evidence that it is incorrect. And no saying "duuuuh it's stooopid" is not evidence.

I consider that these beams, if they exist - I can't check every single bit of EU - are in contradiction with the films.
The worst part is that Saxton tries to plaster his fancy theory on every single beam weapon seen in SW. THAT is a problem.

Well see no one cares what you "consider". Show evidence Saxoton's explanation contradicts the films.

I was only providing an example from the EU, to show that contrary to typical biased SDN belief, not all the EU thinks SW weapons range in lightminutes and travel at c, and that if enemies who can't shoot down cargo ships 5 km away, can still be a menace to all forces in the SW galaxy, we clearly have a good indication of how good the aiming range of the opposed forces must be as well.

And you still didn't answer how big or maneuverable those ships were. And we have seen Trek ships miss from several hundred meters and in "Call to arms" DS9 filled the view as Dominion fleet approached it yet in the next scene Damar states they won't be in range for another minute. I guess any instance of greater range in Trek is a CONTRADICTION!!!!!!

Yes, I know, and that's precisely why I said that the greater ranges (hundreds of kms) are only good against bigger ships.

However, this is amusing coming from one who thinks beams travel at c.

I'm tired of that reasonable. How can you honestly pretend that the head of a beam will travel at c towards its target?

Please, for the sake of those little catgirls, provide the evidence that we apparently have all missed.

So c beams would have perfect accuracy? Never mind that we are talking about Vong ships which are said to fire some kind of "gold" plasma blobs or whatever. Please try to remember what you are talking about.

Grevious, or for that matter any captain in the opening space battle in ROTS on the side of the separatists, not opening fire with more powerful shots, or blatantly question any order not to (the republic obviously didn't want to endanger old Palpy.)

Who says they didn't? All we know they most likely spared the Invisible Hand.

The Gungan army not being obliterated on its way to fight the battledroid army. It obviously had no shield up at the time, the area had no strategic value for the trade federation, and any ship in the blockade could have easily ended it.

The Gungan army could've been obliterated even with low kiloton shots, even with ton shots and I think we can agree that SW civilization is at least capable of that no? So the decision not to destroy them by orbital bombardment had to do with something else other than lack of firepower.

The apparent low yields observed at Endor.

What low yields?

The lack of even low kiloton yields demonstrated at any point in the battle with the republic army at genosis. The vast majority of the Separatists army is comprised of droids and the Separatists should have no problem obliterating a few thousand that will ultimately be lost regardless. The blast effects from say, 3 kilotons, would easily decimate the republic army with very little negative effect over all to the battlefield.

US army didn't demonstrate even low kiloton yields during the entire Vietnam war in which it lost 58,000 people AND the war. Does that mean they didn't have mulitimegaton bombs at their disposal? Of course not. There were some political/tactical reasons such yields were not used which are not immediately apparent.

The Death Star not opening fire at a vast distance on the fighters approaching it from Yavin, when such yields would certainly engulf the tight formation, and opening fire that early on would certainly make it much more difficult for the fighters to approach.

Could the weapons designed for "large scale attack" hit X-wings that far away? Besides it all happened quickily and Death Star crew probably didn't have time to react. It was the Death Star's first combat mission after all.

General Veers apparent lack of repeated kiloton level firepower during the battle at Hoth (this isn't to say blasts even reaching that of Hiroshima, but more akin to a tactical nuclear bomb).

First I would say that generator destruction does reach kiloton level but more importantly just because a civilization posseses weapons of mass destruction that doesn't mean it will decide to use them at every turn just like today's countries don't.

Why any government would allow, even in hard to police areas, bounty hunters to roam with gigaton level firepower.

Why would they allow them to roam with kiloton level firepower?

Why the displayed effects of the vast majority of fighter craft against supposedly shielded targets appear to have discernible and apparent negative effects when these ships should be all but immune to fighter attack.

When did this happen?

Why fighters are even used when anyone can slug 200 gigaton blasts around but their fighters can not. For that matter, why any ship would feel even remotely threatened by said fighters.

Many fighter sized vessels carry missiles which can possibly break through the shields as well as attack weak spots on the shields with greater precision than capital ships.

So I take it then that you also accept the EU "Flack" bursts, and the weak firepower on an SSD (all in the EU), as well as the Turbolasers using Tibanna gas?

I already had this discussion and as it turned out NOWHERE does it state that turbolasers themselves somehow explode into flak bursts.
Secondly flak comes from german Fliegerabwehrkanonen and as Merriam Webster shows definition 1 is simply antiaricraft guns.

If the ships were that heavy damaged then only because they weren't protected by their shields anymore. Otherwise the shields would have prevented that damage as it is supposed to do.

Or shall we assume that Star Wars shields aren't capable to sufficiently protect their ships so that the crew of such a ship can already be dead and the ship a shell while the shields are still up?

Ever heard of energy bleed through?

I know that destructive energy can bleed through the shields. But not in an extent that the ship is already a hulk, the crew dead - but the shields are still up.

Why not? If bleedthrough destroys life support, engines and causes decompression but doesn't hurt shield generator what is the problem?

How can it be that an armour that is allegedly able to withstand the energy of several ten-thousands atomic bombs (200 gigatons would be equal to 48'000 ZAR atomic bombs or a TNT volume of 142 billion m³ and weight of about 235 quadrillion kilogram.) is affected so much only by aerodynamic heating?

No one ever said the armor can withstand such power only shields.

The re-entry shouldn't have affected the hull of the Invisible Hand at all, if it would be able to withstand only one single atomic bomb.

The re-entry couldn't have hurt the hulk that bad if the cockpit glass and those thin antennae at the back remained untouched.

Only therafter has Needa learnt that the Chancellor is still alive and the ship was captured.

There is no indication and no plausible reason why they should have dialed down their weapons power.

Or Needa was still bluffing when he said he will destroy the ship in 10 minutes. He knew rescue attempt is underway and had no confirmation Palpatine is dead. Invisible Hand was barely hanging on and Needa could afford to try and carefuly disable it completely. No reason to assume he blasted it with full power.

Otherwise - after a certain time lapse in which they should have answered - I have to assume either

* that they are too proud to concede or

* that they are simply impolite that they - although they have voluntarily engaged in this debate - do not finish it and ignore furthermore a direct request to avow themself.

Or 3 we have beaten down your points many times but you keep coming back with same ones and then the thread drags to 10 pages. I have seen it happen and when it becomes clear that neither side is going to budge from the original position then the discussion becomes pointless.

[Jedi Master Spock]

I've seen the other thread and it doesn't change the fact that all you can make out is a lower limit. As for starships EU describes them as blowing off planetary atmosphere so yes they do have such firepower. As does Death Star which I will answer below.

Actually, those are not lower limits. They are reasonably accurate estimates based on effect - i.e., estimates within a reasonable MOE of both lower and upper limits on the actual effect of the seismic charge.

I'm sure better estimates can be made, but any energy in excess of (say) 10 MT is clearly not actually applied to targets in the area of effect - i.e., is not part of the effective yield.

No one ever said the armor can withstand such power only shields.

You may wish to read through the ROTS novelization quote he posted.

Ever heard of the phrase absence of proof is not proof of absence? We know they must have more powerful reactors from the feats we've seen them accomplish.

The only thing dramatic enough to suggest strongly more powerful reactors is the superlaser.

[Who is like God arbour]

If the ships were that heavy damaged then only because they weren't protected by their shields anymore. Otherwise the shields would have prevented that damage as it is supposed to do.

Or shall we assume that Star Wars shields aren't capable to sufficiently protect their ships so that the crew of such a ship can already be dead and the ship a shell while the shields are still up?

Ever heard of energy bleed through?

That quesion is superfluous. The next sentence of my post has answered it already. And I assume that you read totally through a post before answering it.

I know that destructive energy can bleed through the shields. But not in an extent that the ship is already a hulk, the crew dead - but the shields are still up.

Why not? If bleedthrough destroys life support, engines and causes decompression but doesn't hurt shield generator what is the problem?

Because that doesn't made sense. The shields are there to protect the ship. They have to take the brunt of an attack. That's why they should be usually the first main system on board of a ship that gets destroyed. They would be nearly useless if they let destructive energy through in an extent that makes the ship to a shell or hulk and kills the crew.

Furthermore, the shields are needing energy. These has to be produced in the reactor and conducted to the shield generators. From a certain extent of damages, that couldn't happen anymore. And as long as the Invisible Hand if firing uninterrupted on these ships, the damage gets more and more and even if there would have been shield strength remaining, it would be exhausted rather quickly.

Besides both terms - shell and hulk - as I understand it both from their official meaning as well as from the context - imply that the shields are destroyed too:

• • • Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:
      
      • shell:
        • Main Entry: shell
          
          Pronunciation: 'shel
          
          Function: noun
          
          Etymology: Middle English, from Old English sciell; akin to Old English scealu shell, Old Norse skel, Lithuanian skelti to split, Greek skallein to hoe
          
          • 1 :
            • a : a hard rigid usually largely calcareous covering or support of an animal
              b : the hard or tough often thin outer covering of an egg (as of a bird or reptile) -- see EGG illustration
            
            
            2 : the covering or outside part of a fruit or seed especially when hard or fibrous
            
            3 : shell material (as of mollusks or turtles) or their substance
            
            4 : something that resembles a shell: as
            • a : a framework or exterior structure; especially : a building with an unfinished interior
              b :
              • (1) : an external case or outside covering <the shell of a ship>
                (2) : a thin usually spherical layer or surface enclosing a space or surrounding an object <an expanding shell of gas around a neutron star>
              
              c : a casing without substance <mere effigies and shells of men -- Thomas Carlyle>
              d : an edible crust for holding a filling <a pastry shell> <a taco salad in a tortilla shell>
              e : BAND SHELL
              f : a small beer glass
              g : an unlined article of outerwear
            
            
            5 : a shell-bearing mollusk
            
            6 : an impersonal attitude or manner that conceals the presence or absence of feeling <he retreated into his shell>
            
            7 : a narrow light racing boat propelled by one or more persons pulling oars or sculls
            
            8 : any of the regions occupied by the orbits of a group of electrons of approximately equal energy surrounding the nucleus of an atom
            
            9 :
            • a : a projectile for cannon containing an explosive bursting charge
              b : a metal or paper case which holds the charge of powder and shot or bullet used with breech-loading small arms
            
            
            10 : a plain usually sleeveless blouse or sweater
            
            11 : a company or corporation that exists without assets or independent operations as a legal entity through which another company or corporation can conduct various dealings
      
      
      
      • hulk:
        • Main Entry: hulk
          
          Pronunciation: 'h&lk
          
          Function: noun
          
          Etymology: Middle English hulke, from Old English hulc, probably from Medieval Latin holcas, from Greek holkas, from helkein to pull -- more at SULCUS
          
          • 1 :
            • a : a heavy clumsy ship
              b :
              • (1) : the body of an old ship unfit for service
                (2) : a ship used as a prison -- usually used in plural <every prisoner sent to the hulks -- Kenneth Roberts>
              
              c : an abandoned wreck or shell (as of a building or automobile)
            
            2 : one that is bulky or unwieldy <a big hulk of a man>

• • ... Mas Ramdar had sustained so much damage already that it was little more than a target to absorb the Hand's return fire, and Indomitable was only a shell, most of its crew dead ...

There is nothing that indicates that the shields are still up. The most obvious interpretation is that these ships are as good as dead.

Another interpretation seems far-fetched if there are no additional convincing explanations why it should be plausible.

• • • For example, do you know one single event (from the EU or any other science fiction series or movies - I don't care for that example) in which a ship was in a battle so heavily damaged that most of its crew was killed and it could only be described as a shell or a hulk - but its shields were still up?

If you have no plausible reason, why one should assume that - although there is no indication for that, your explanation - although maybe possible - would appear as the effort to retcon the plot.

Many things are possible. The question only is, are they probable and thus plausible or are they indeed possible but totally far-fetched and not convincing.

And one should always consider that an explanation should also be convincing for those who don't know the EU and have only seen the movies and read their novelizations.

How can it be that an armour that is allegedly able to withstand the energy of several ten-thousands atomic bombs (200 gigatons would be equal to 48'000 ZAR atomic bombs or a TNT volume of 142 billion m³ and weight of about 235 quadrillion kilogram.) is affected so much only by aerodynamic heating?

No one ever said the armor can withstand such power only shields.

There are many Star Wars debater who are saying exactly that.

And that would be reasonable:

If a ship has lost its shield and get hit in the next instance by a weapon that is supposed to be 200 gigatons powerful and isn't vaporized at once, the logical conclusion has to be that the hull of the ship has to be able to withstand these 200 gigatons.

The same reasoning applies to fighters like the TIE-fighters, which have no shields. If they get hit by a weapon that is supposed to direct 600 GW to a target, like these from a X-Wing, they would be vaporized at once - unless their hull is made of some exotic matter.

The problem with that reasoning is, that we never see how a capital ship or a starfighter is vaporized - although it is known that they aren't ptotected by shields (anymore).

And we have seen that the Invisible Hand's hull is not able to withstand even the comparatively low energies it is exposed at a re-entry.

With so little resistance, it shouldn't even be able to withstand Hiroshima scale weapons fire (15 kilotons of TNT equivalent in explosive force, i.e. 6.3 × 1013 joules = 63 TJ (terajoules).

The re-entry shouldn't have affected the hull of the Invisible Hand at all, if it would be able to withstand only one single atomic bomb.

The re-entry couldn't have hurt the hulk that bad if the cockpit glass and those thin antennae at the back remained untouched.

I assume that you have seen the same movie I have seen. You have seen the damage the hull has taken. You have seen the dark wads of smoke - the vaporized matter.

• 
  
  

The re-entry has nearly disintegrated the Invisible Hand's hull.

• • ... "Strap in. Now. We're going in hot." Anakin grimaced at the scraps of burning hull flashing past the view wall. "In more ways than one." ...
    
    ... Needa glanced down at the boil of hull plating that was burning off the falling cruiser ...
    
    ... First, a flight of fireships," Needa said, more calmly now. "If they don't get the burnoff under control, there won't be enough hull left to make the surface ...
    
    ... Mace could see the ship now—what was left of it—resting on the scorched platform far ahead: a piece of a ship, a fragment less than a third of what once had been the Trade Federation flagship, still burning despite the gouts of fire-suppression foam raining down on it from five different ships and the emergency-support clone troops who surrounded it on the platform ...

That the cockpit glass and those thin antennae at the back remained untouched could have been because they were protected by the main body of the Invisible Hand that has taken the brunt of the atmospheric friction the same way a space shuttle re-enters atmosphere. The windows of the space shuttle are not more resistant against heat than the tiles of the heat shield.

• • 
    
    

Only therafter has Needa learnt that the Chancellor is still alive and the ship was captured.

There is no indication and no plausible reason why they should have dialed down their weapons power.

Or Needa was still bluffing when he said he will destroy the ship in 10 minutes. He knew rescue attempt is underway and had no confirmation Palpatine is dead. Invisible Hand was barely hanging on and Needa could afford to try and carefuly disable it completely. No reason to assume he blasted it with full power.

Ah - he has dialed the power down to less than a hundred-thousandth of the nominal weapons output. By the way, that was sarcasm.

Because, as I have already said, 200 gigatons would be equal to 48'000 ZAR atomic bombs. But the energy of one single ZAR atomic bomb would be more than enough to destroy the Invisible Hand at once, if it is not even able to withstand the aerodynamic heating of a re-entry.

Not only that that was nowhere mentioned, Grievous would have to be really stupid if he doesn't notice that.

Besides, the most obvious interpretation is that Needa has not bluffed.

After Grievous was not able to show the Chancellor, there was no reason to assume that he was still alive.

Another interpretation seems far-fetched if there are no additional convincing explanations why it should be plausible.

If you have no plausible reason, why one should assume that Needa has only bluffed - although there is no indication for that, your explanation - although maybe possible - would appear as the effort to retcon the plot.

Many things are possible. The question only is, are they probable and thus plausible or are they indeed possible but totally far-fetched and not convincing.

And one should always consider that an explanation should also be convincing for those who don't know the EU and have only seen the movies and read their novelizations.

[Mr. Oragahn]

The first calc starts on the assumption that the asteroid was 2 km away from the point of explosion.
The second one starts with the assumption of a distance from point of explosion about 2.4 km.

Besides, there's the simple fact that even massive starships can't seem able to dispatch that amount of power in single salvos, with massive power cores to back them up.
It's illogical that a mini bomb could have 12 GT worth of punch.

For more details, let's see... I'm opening a new thread.

I've seen the other thread and it doesn't change the fact that all you can make out is a lower limit.

But I've updated the thread and actually came with what I consider an already too generous high end, of roughly 3.3 megatons.

As for starships EU describes them as blowing off planetary atmosphere so yes they do have such firepower. As does Death Star which I will answer below.

You mean... Dankayo? That is one incident, not multiple ones, and this level of firepower hardly meshes with the end results, reported by someone less than one month ago, on this forum, when Dankayo surface again.

If it's not about Dankayo, then make it clear please.

Oh no, it's not that simple. People have said countless times that the ICS numbers were right.
Accepting the numbers because they come from the ICS, is one thing. Which I have gripes against considering that I'm always suspicious of EU claims.

But claiming that the numbers are correct because Saxton knows what he's talking about, then I ask to see the proof that he knew what he talked about. That is, his calcs.

The thread is validity of ICS no? That's all I'm interested in.

The validity of the ICS is about the validity of its content.
It's funny how before the AOTC:ICS, it wasn't such an heresy to question figures from EU books, notably WEG guides.

But tell me, what is the evidence Saxton used to come with so many high figures?

Because, you know, the point of guides is to actually explain what's on screen. Match what's on screen. Not come with content that is by default, indirectly unsupported at best, directly contradicted at worst.

You don't need the exact figures. It is said that the LAATs are shielded.

Now think about it. If those things carry shields, they're ought to match, at least, the power of those mounted on fighters or bombers, right?
There are allthose post 2002 claims that fighters have kiloton lasers, at least. And so shields are.
However, in this thread, we show that such shields can't be so powerful.

In other words ICS doesn't make any statements regarding those two vehicles therefore their displayed firepower and shielding in films cannot contradict ICS.

I find it dubious that the ICS has no stuff about the LAAT, considering that it features one of the cover.
Even more, the novelisation says they have shields.

There is no reason to believe an atmospheric troop transport must have the same reactor class as fighters which are expected to engage even capital ships.

So you admit that the fighters, transfering the power from their core to their weapons, makes them a significant and relevant menace against capital ships.

What exactly does this, if true, prove? They don't mention annihilation reactors so what?

They don't exist.

Ever heard of the phrase absence of proof is not proof of absence?

Yes, I heard about it, but it does not apply very well when the book says that fusion cores power everything. Of course, if annihilation cores were used by all capships, as the ICS implies, the tales would be much different.

Sigh.
It is not the calculation that is in problem, as far as the Death Star is concerned. You understand that maths can be correct, even if they're off topic, irrelevant, and based on a flawed premise, right?
It's like saying there were two groups of three persons each, and the people on your side would say then that 2 x 40,000,000 = 80,000,000 persons. The math's good, but relies on wrong premises.

You have shown zero proof or reasoning as to why we should assume Death Star didn't require the neccesary power to blow up the planet. No one has suggested a working alternative.

Pay attention to how your word it. You say "neccesary power to blow up the planet". Depending on what power means, yes, the Death Star has the power to blow planets up.

That said, does the Death Star achieve this by firing a pure and raw energy beam at a planet?

Not exactly.

Not to mention various quotes from EU all of which describe superlaser as raw power and Inside the Worlds even states Death Star power generation is equal to hundred of supergiant stars I believe.

Please. Curtis Saxton was coauthor on Inside the Worlds of Star Wars: Attack of the Clones, and probably dropped a few things or two in the following book.

As for the rest of the EU, who gives? We know that when this claim was made by an EU source, it was during a period when people didn't spent that much time on theories and analysing stuff in detail.
I don't care if an EU source claims that it's a raw laser weapon. A raw laser weapon doesn't only scorch the hemisphere of planet, to let the planet explode on its own a second later.

Dookus escape from Geonosis, Endor approach.

As I said, calcs please.

I already covered it several times on this forum. Dooku flies from ground to beyond Geonosis' rings (10,000km) in the time it takes Amidala to run 10 meters and Yoda to pick up his cane.

I don't remember seeing you provide any calculations.

Besides, looking at the film is simple to reveal that's just the fluke of a weird cut. When Dooku leaves the cave, Amidala and clonetroopers fire at his ship.
The camera then moves to Dooku's ship, filming the cockpit's portside. The blaster bolts catch it up and even largely doubletake the vessel. We can also see the background moving behind, at speeds which are simply too low to be anything close to your claim.
Finally, there's the simple fact that Dooku's ship doesn't zap in front of the core ships when it reaches space.

In Endor approach the planet visibly grows as the fleet approaches it. That's speed on the order of 100km/s with a breaking room of about 100,000km.

The same scene where the Death Star appears significantly bigger than during the whole rest of the film?
Sketchy evidence, at best. People chalk it up to hyperspace distorsion.

That theory is insanely stupid in terms of military science.
It's ashaming that Saxton would so strongly believe in it.

Are spinning photons more ridiculous that Death Star magically blowing up a planet without providing any power?

Sheesh. The first, military wise, is stupid. The second is about a non fully explained mechanical feature. I can't believe you're mixing both.

"A non fully explained mechanical feature"? You haven't explained ANYTHING other than of course it must be much weaker than 10^38J. Of that you are absolutely sure. By all means explain how it's "military wise" stupid.

Stop with your red herrings.

Saxton's explanation for how the weapons work is stupid, because military wise it makes no sense.

The Death Star's mechanism is a whole different, because we're not denying the end result, that is, the planet blowing up. We're denying that claim that is just a raw beam.

You, despite the time we've talked about the Death Star, kept dodging the "delay element", the dreadful symptom that all Wongies hate like pox and ignore at will.

Will you prove better, or just glaringly dismiss it like SDN crowds have been for quite some time now?

Yes he does. Doesn't make it sensical anytime, military wise.

If you wish, you can reply to this question as well:

What's better between an invisible direct beam that travels at c, and a beam that's slowed down to a poor fraction of c, to allow a visible tracer make the beam's origin and destination obvious?

The second option, which is completely stupid anyway, would only start to make a shred of sense if the gunmen could only rely on sheer sight to aim at their target.

The tracer is a byproduct of the turbolaser not something gunners can turn on and off. Secondly it is possible that turbolaser technology allows the SW civilization to achieve greater firepower than with ordinary lasers so they are used instead.

Then please explain this:

Energy Weapons
Energy weapons fire invisible energy beams at lightspeed. The visible "bolt"
is a glowing pulse that travels along the beam at less than lightspeed...The
light given off by visible bolts depletes the overall energy content of a
beam, limiting its range. Turbolasers gain a longer range by spinning the
energy beam, which reduces waste glow.

Why even at very close ranges, the bolts still travel at much less than c, and explosions don't occur immediately.
Why bolts fired at long ranges (TPM: core ship vs Naboo yatch) are as glowy as the bolt fired by the same cannons, against nearby N-1 fighters.
If they're just firing nothing more than energy beams, then how can some warsies still pretend that the coreship in AOTC, downed by SPHA-Ts, has an uber armour, while obviously the blue energy beams didn't bleed that much energy into the atmosphere?

Not having an explanation doesn't mean we have to accept a stupid one.

If the explanation is give by an official source then yes you have. Unless you can find direct evidence that it is incorrect. And no saying "duuuuh it's stooopid" is not evidence.

No. Otherwise, please explain how it makes sense to critically reduce the speed of bolts or beams to gain greater range, when what matters in space, is above all the speed at which your projectile/bolt/whatever will travel to your target.

Please explain, or just admit it's a stupid theory, military wise.

I was only providing an example from the EU, to show that contrary to typical biased SDN belief, not all the EU thinks SW weapons range in lightminutes and travel at c, and that if enemies who can't shoot down cargo ships 5 km away, can still be a menace to all forces in the SW galaxy, we clearly have a good indication of how good the aiming range of the opposed forces must be as well.

And you still didn't answer how big or maneuverable those ships were.

Oh yes. Weapons can fire lasers in the teraton/gigaton whatelse, but instead of firing them at c, like normal lasers, they, huh, reduce their speed to gain range. So then, they're sure that the targets will easily evade the fire.
I'm not specifically talking about the Vector Prime incident, since they used plasma-like stuff, and still won battles against capital ships apparently able to move at thousand of gees and strike over lightminutes *sigh*. I'm also talking about the "weapon range" from the TESB novel, which in concordance with the film, clearly show that the lightminute claim is incorrect.

And we have seen Trek ships miss from several hundred meters and in "Call to arms" DS9 filled the view as Dominion fleet approached it yet in the next scene Damar states they won't be in range for another minute. I guess any instance of greater range in Trek is a CONTRADICTION!!!!!!

I'm not a Trekkie, I don't care about it.
Do not evade the question, by the way.
Star Trek is not in question here.

Yes, I know, and that's precisely why I said that the greater ranges (hundreds of kms) are only good against bigger ships.

However, this is amusing coming from one who thinks beams travel at c.

I'm tired of that reasonable. How can you honestly pretend that the head of a beam will travel at c towards its target?

Please, for the sake of those little catgirls, provide the evidence that we apparently have all missed.

So c beams would have perfect accuracy? Never mind that we are talking about Vong ships which are said to fire some kind of "gold" plasma blobs or whatever. Please try to remember what you are talking about.

And please try to remember that those weapons were still plain enough to rule over warships which apparently could fire weapons at c, over light minute ranges.

Yeah. Solid evidence.

[GStone]

Has Sarli ever given an explanation to link the quad TL figure from the ICS, like he did for the fuel usage, to the rest of the EU?

[Mr. Oragahn]

Has Sarli ever given an explanation to link the quad TL figure from the ICS, like he did for the fuel usage, to the rest of the EU?

None I know. It would be hard to come with one. While you can mess around with mass lighting tech theories, trying to apply the same reasonings to sheer firepower figures is impossible.
In fact, he simply doesn't try, and merely points out, rather bluntly, that Saxton lacked honesty in his overestimated figures, and says they're, at least, 1000 times too high.

[Trinoya]

Who says they didn't? All we know they most likely spared the Invisible Hand.

The movie says they didn't. We see these ships fighting in the background, clearly in reasonable condition, we see that they are not returning gigaton fire power to their enemies. A decidedly stupid tactic when they are not the ones who have to be concerned about keeping anyone alive.

The Gungan army could've been obliterated even with low kiloton shots, even with ton shots and I think we can agree that SW civilization is at least capable of that no? So the decision not to destroy them by orbital bombardment had to do with something else other than lack of firepower.

They were given direct orders to defeat the Gungans. These are some very poor tacticians to not even use a 10 ton bomb (which would have also put the battle to a stop before it even began).

What low yields?

We see direct capital ship fire that ultimately results in the destruction of a star destroyer. That said, the shots had no visible high end yield effects. We see two ships, a star destroyer and a frigate exchange fire within several hundred yards of one another, the fire power demonstrated is decidedly sub kiloton. This was a battle for their lives, a battle to defeat the empire, and a battle where everything, EVERYTHING, was on the line, I'm reasonably sure they would have dialed those weapons up to full power. We also see projectile impacts on star destroyer shields with, noticeably, less than kiloton effects.

US army didn't demonstrate even low kiloton yields during the entire Vietnam war in which it lost 58,000 people AND the war. Does that mean they didn't have mulitimegaton bombs at their disposal? Of course not. There were some political/tactical reasons such yields were not used which are not immediately apparent.

The US army is irrelevant as it had citizens, its own men, and a political climate at home to worry about. In fact many generals argued for the use of its 11 ton bombs on targets, as opposed to just making helicopter landing zones with them...

At the battle in question, the Separatists are suddenly in a tactically poor position, desperately attempting a fighting retreat, a position that would have been IMMEDIATELY rectified with a single kiloton shot. No one knew about this 'clone army' no one cares about battle droids, and the battle is far enough away from the tower that a single kiloton would have hardly endangered the populace of the planet. It would have, however, eliminated a lot of jedi, thousands of clones, and bought them the time they needed to get off the planet. The republic could not have afforded to do the same as they wanted to rescue the jedi.

Could the weapons designed for "large scale attack" hit X-wings that far away? Besides it all happened quickily and Death Star crew probably didn't have time to react. It was the Death Star's first combat mission after all.

First combat mission hardly matters, WW2 naval warfare, which is exactly what Lucas had based his concept of space battles off of, had clear guide lines to fire EVERYTHING you had, including your main guns, at incoming aircraft... even on your first mission. The Bismarck is a classic example of the tactic in practice.

This is a case where high yield long range weapons would be PERFECT. You only need to hit ONCE, and we can assume the death star has more than enough firepower to shoot hundreds of thousands, if not millions of turbolasers in the general direction of the fighter group during their approach.

Of course, I can also accept that Tarkin was a bad military commander due to his ego, which is just as likely, if not more so.

First I would say that generator destruction does reach kiloton level but more importantly just because a civilization posseses weapons of mass destruction that doesn't mean it will decide to use them at every turn just like today's countries don't.

I easily agree with the generator as I did say repeated shots (though some can argue the generator itself contributed to that explosion). That said, a single kiloton shot at the launching area would have prevented any more rebels from escaping. A single kiloton shot into the trenches would eliminate the rebels there. Hoth is not an inhabitied world and the only consideration anyone has is that Luke could be in the battle, and knowing that they STILL opened fire on the snow speeders, where he was most likely to be.

This is either a case of, "we don't have it" or, "were too dumb to use it."

Why would they allow them to roam with kiloton level firepower?

Answer: They wouldn't if they truly had the fire power to stop it.

On a side note: This is actually a moot point, as before hand the republic did not have an army to stop such activities. I shall drop this one in retrospect and readdress it later with a new point (a friend of mine just pointed it out). Therefore, the republic couldn't have policed it before, it didn't have the capability.

When did this happen?

The most netorious examples of fighter vs capital ship issues: The alliance frigate, the Star Destroyer Dome, the A-Wing crashing through the windows, the destruction of various pieces of the death star (deflection tower comes to mind), the destruction of the shield mechanism in ROTS, damage to a star destroyers with laser fire, and the dedicated use of fighters against capital ships seen in episode 1, 3, 4, and 6 as a viable tactic.]

Many fighter sized vessels carry missiles which can possibly break through the shields as well as attack weak spots on the shields with greater precision than capital ships.

We've only seen missiles used against the exterior of a capital ship twice out of six movies. I'd say that is not their primary means of damaging capital ships (especially considering the attack on the death star). We see it used once in Episode 1, and once in episode six, and we don't know the source of the projectile in episode six.

That means there is only ONE confirmed use of missiles launched by fighters being used against the surface of capital ships. Even star trek has more than that.

Does this mean they don't have those? No, it is obviously confirmed that fighter craft have missiles... Heck, it is even confirmed that capital ships have missiles after ROTS, but that said it appears that their primary armament does the job just as easily, and potentially better.


Note: the above post was rushed due to an emergency, if I missed something please respond to that point directly as well.