"Star Wars: Death Star" and the destruction of Ald

For reviews and close examination of sources - episode reviews, book reviews, raves and rants about short stories, et cetera.
Post Reply
User avatar
Who is like God arbour
Starship Captain
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Germany

"Star Wars: Death Star" and the destruction of Ald

Post by Who is like God arbour » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:10 am

Star Wars: Death Star is a novel written by Michael Reaves and Steve Perry, and was published on October 16, 2007 by Del Rey. It covers the history of the Death Star, from its design stages as seen in Rogue Planet and Attack of the Clones, its appearances in Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope, and its prototype. Segments of the book are to be told from an Imperial perspective.
          • Image
Publisher's summary wrote:The untold story of the ultimate weapon—created to annihilate worlds…and enslave a galaxy!

The Death Star's name says it all, with bone-chilling accuracy. It is a virtual world unto itself—equipped with uncanny power for a singularly brutal purpose: to obliterate entire planets in the blink of an eye. Its annihilation of the planet Alderaan lives in infamy. And its own ultimate destruction, at the hands of Luke Skywalker, is the stuff of legend. But what is the whole story, and who are the players, behind the creation of this world-killing satellite of doom?

The near extermination of the Jedi order cleared the way for Palpatine—power-hungry Senator and Sith Lord—to seize control of the Republic, declare himself Emperor, and usher in a fearsome, totalitarian regime. But even with the dreaded Darth Vader to enforce his sinister will, the threat of rebellion still looms. And the Emperor knows that only abject fear—and the ability to punish dissent with devastating consequences—can ensure his unchallenged control of the galaxy. Enter ambitious and ruthless government official Wilhuff Tarkin, architect of the Emperor's terrifying dream come true.

But from inception to completion, construction of the unprecedented Death Star is awash in the intrigues, hidden agendas, unexpected revelations, and daring gambits of those involved on every level. The brightest minds and boldest egos, the most ambitious and corrupt, the desperate and the devious, all have a stake in the Death Star and its potential to control the fate of the galaxy.

Soldiers and slaves, loyalists and Rebels, spies and avengers, the innocent and the evil—all their paths and fates will cross and intertwine as the Death Star moves from its maiden voyage to its final showdown and a shadowy chapter of Star Wars history is stunningly illuminated in a thrilling, unforgettable adventure.


That book is already discussed on SDN:
      • Ender wrote:Anyone pick this up yet? I flipped through it at B&N today, but did not buy. I got about halfway before flipping through to choice bits and leaving.

        The authors do a fairly decent job of sticking to a quasi-hard approach to it. Lots of talk about asteroid and comet mining, discussion of realistic space weapons, etc. But at the same time they manage to get a lot of the tech right - thousands of Gs, hypermatter as tachyons, etc.

        That siad it has a few disconnects - talking about how it would take the biggest focusing ring ever made to build a weapon more powrful then any star destroyer can mount to blow up an asteroid in one shot. Now given that the new definitions on what is what in space means that an asteroid can be the size of Pluto or larger, I guess that isn't a problem. IIRC there are asteroids in the belt that are bigger then some moons, so while it is awkward to say it like that, it isn't inherently wrong.

        In talking about tachyons and hypermatter reactors it says that the destruction of tachyons results in nearly unlimited energy, making it sound like some kind of Zero Point energy source. The character saying this admits to not understanding the physics, but still a little odd that it ignores E=mc^2

        When popping Alderaan, it says the beam does more destruction then it's mass-energy equivlence would have, becaus it opens a hole into hyperspace to bring in the extra energy, and that the ring we see is a result of it. Yeah....


        SO anyone got it?
        Darth Ruinus wrote:
        Ender wrote:When popping Alderaan, it says the beam does more destruction then it's mass-energy equivlence would have, becaus it opens a hole into hyperspace to bring in the extra energy, and that the ring we see is a result of it. Yeah....


        SO anyone got it?
        So, does that mean that t r e k t a r d s like JMSpock will actually have some credence to their claims that the DS cant possibly supply all the power needed to kill a planet?

        THe movis DO say that the DS machines have enough power to destroy a planet, but, I guess some might find that as too vague.

        I hope I am wrong. The DS is absolutely terrifying BECAUSE it makes all the energy needed.

        Or is there other canon that refutes this?
        Darth Wong wrote:
        Darth Ruinus wrote:
        Ender wrote:When popping Alderaan, it says the beam does more destruction then it's mass-energy equivlence would have, becaus it opens a hole into hyperspace to bring in the extra energy, and that the ring we see is a result of it. Yeah....


        SO anyone got it?
        So, does that mean that trektards like JMSpock will actually have some credence to their claims that the DS cant possibly supply all the power needed to kill a planet?

        THe movis DO say that the DS machines have enough power to destroy a planet, but, I guess some might find that as too vague.

        I hope I am wrong. The DS is absolutely terrifying BECAUSE it makes all the energy needed.

        Or is there other canon that refutes this?
        That's a completely retarded rationalization because it means that ships must have un-fucking-believable shields in order to survive even a few moments in hyperspace. Let JMSpock try to run with it and you can just shove that right up his ass.
What are your opinions?



    • Edited because:
        • Darth Ruinus wrote:Hey guys, not to take away from this debate, but, I was checking starfleetjedi, and this "Who is God like arbour" guy quoted me as saying
          So, does that mean that reasonable and intelligent Star Trek fans like JMSpock
          I NEVER EVER said reasonable and intelligent, I said T R E K T A R D S. I hope someone from that site sees this message, because I certainly do NOT like being misquoted.

          Sorry, but it really got me mad. :D
      I have not noticed that the word T R E K T A R D S was changed automatically to "reasonable and intelligent Star Trek fans" until I have read this complaint. I do not approve of such insults. But a quote has to be correct. Insofar, the complaint of Darth Ruinus is justified.
Last edited by Who is like God arbour on Fri Oct 19, 2007 6:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:28 pm

Well, quite obviously, as with any EU source, particularly "technical" books, it's probably a mixed bag. Like most technical manuals - from the TNGTM in Star Trek to the ICS books - I'd take it with a grain of salt.

To gauge by Ender's review, it reaffirms some ICS material, which is not too surprising even if they've been retconning his stuff left and right, explicitly says that the Death Star did not generate the 1e38-39 joules that Wong and Saxton has been insisting on, and suggests sub-ICS firepower figures - which is also not surprising.

It'll certainly be interesting to look at what the new official EU story of the Death Star's origins will be and how thorough the retcons are after the prequels, but I don't think I'll bother to buy it before it comes out it paperback.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:40 pm

I'll return on the rest of the stuff later on, but the weapon that opens an hyperspace window in the middle of the planet is a theory I particularily fancied for a while.
Both technobabblish and in phase enough with some EU, and above all, with the description from the novelization, not to have certain people whine and moan endlessly, it particularily well sums up the stuff that happens:

First explosion, still good, and enough to destroy a planet, as "damage a planet to completely ruins its biosphere eternally", but also drills through the core, and starts a chain reaction there, which goes boom and does the real overkill stuff.

A new kind of weapon, for a new level of terror.

I'm happy. :)

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Post by Praeothmin » Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:49 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:I'm happy. :)
Of course you are, you Trekkie you... :)

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:13 pm

Praeothmin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:I'm happy. :)
Of course you are, you Trekkie you... :)
Oh yeah. You know how to speak to me.

I feel so dirty now.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:46 pm

Darth Ruinus wrote: I hope I am wrong. The DS is absolutely terrifying BECAUSE it makes all the energy needed.
I guess that's the difference him and me. For me, the battlestation was absolutely terrific because it was huge, the Empire had ressources and power to build such outsized things, and it blew planets up in no time, commanded by frightening bureaucrat nazis.

Not because it poured x boobajoules into its target.

Here goes the downscaling argument, by the way. Not entirely, mind you, but sufficiently to stop using it in favour of unreasonable claims about power generation, firepower and else.
Darth Wong wrote:That's a completely retarded rationalization because it means that ships must have un-fucking-believable shields in order to survive even a few moments in hyperspace.
As I understand it, the book's explanation is that the Death Star actually gathers hypermatter in large quantities, and makes it undergo a reaction within the planet. I may be wrong on that, though.

But if it's true, it means that somewhere, the beam's like dropping an hyperdrive in the middle of that planet, or something, safe that it's more like a window that remains constantly opened, and pours hypermatter (or the reaction more appropriate drains hypermatter from hyperspace).

But what really happens with hypermatter under its, well, natural state, for a lack of better words. As long as it's not pur into a chain reaction (to generate energy), why would ships have anything to fear about this ressource?

By the way, the hypermatter/tachyons stuff was found on Curtis Saxton's page, and still is.

Really, has any EU source exactly gauged the densities of hypermatter within hyperspace, how the Death Star's weapon actually syphons and gathers that necessary mass (the volume that's actually tapped into), and what are the true reactions (or non reactions) between ships and hypermatter, while they travel in hyperspace?

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:42 pm

I saw this book the other day, but only skimmed through various random chapters. The explanation about hyperspace is quite interesting in that it seems to be a compromise between the two camps of whether the Death Stars' superlasers actually are bolts in excess of 1e32 joules of energy, or destroy via an exotic, far less powerful chain-reaction. Sadly, this will probably make neither faction very happy, which appears to be the case on SDN, and they are already trying to spin it into something they can use against the pro-Trek side, or rather their new focus of hate: Jedi Master Spock.
-Mike

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: "Star Wars: Death Star" and the destruction of

Post by 2046 » Fri Oct 19, 2007 10:55 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:
Ender wrote: When popping Alderaan, it says the beam does more destruction then it's mass-energy equivlence would have, becaus it opens a hole into hyperspace to bring in the extra energy, and that the ring we see is a result of it. Yeah....
Connor McLeod wrote:Thus, what they've presented us with is basically just a more "magical/exotic" superlaser
Dear Lucas Licensing,

Thanks for yet another smug chuckle.

G2k
ST-v-SW.Net

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Post by Praeothmin » Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:57 pm

I guess that's another EU book the Pro-Wars side will ignore from now on... :)

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Post by Praeothmin » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:05 pm

Speaking of which, there's a nice informative thread at SDN about the Death Star, with passages from the book.

It is interesting:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=50

Go read it, you'll like it (and I am serious, it is worth it).

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:50 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:I saw this book the other day, but only skimmed through various random chapters. The explanation about hyperspace is quite interesting in that it seems to be a compromise between the two camps of whether the Death Stars' superlasers actually are bolts in excess of 1e32 joules of energy, or destroy via an exotic, far less powerful chain-reaction. Sadly, this will probably make neither faction very happy, which appears to be the case on SDN, and they are already trying to spin it into something they can use against the pro-Trek side, or rather their new focus of hate: Jedi Master Spock.
-Mike
Well, wouldn't it still favor the ECR side, though? Yeah, there'd be some brute force going on. You are smashing into a planet a beam of energy that's gonna have some mass to it at that density/volume. The beam punches down a little into the surface and the energy 'opens a hyperspace window' (at this point, the only reference I've ever known was the ICS saying it's a space-time distortion-- it might be a spin off/expansion of their repulsor tech). I wouldn't be surprised if the beam was capable of drawing on some of the surrounding energy from the planet (even if it's just one and not multiple forms) to fuel the size of the window.
Ender wrote:In talking about tachyons and hypermatter reactors it says that the destruction of tachyons results in nearly unlimited energy, making it sound like some kind of Zero Point energy source. The character saying this admits to not understanding the physics, but still a little odd that it ignores E=mc^2
Good lord. That isn't even ZPE theory or anywhere close. Nothing detects an actual object, only the changes said object undergoes. Point charges, like the electron, attract virtual energy 'chunks' by polarizing the surrounding virtual energy around them. They're virtual because the chunks will cause a change somewhere below the minimum energy required for one observable change. When point charges collect enough of them, they reach critical mass and release the minimum amount of energy required to make the lowest form of observable change. They release real, observable energy. And they constantly do this. They've done it for billions of years and show no signs of slowing down anytime soon. The point charges aren't making energy fields out of thin air. There was a sodding nobel prize given out for this 60 years ago.

Given that we don't know the extent of Wars hyperspace, there could be something, like releasing hyperspace flood gates. You expend enough energy to just remove the barrier and the energy released would do its thing without needing any more effort from you and you'd still not violate e=mc2.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:17 pm

Praeothmin wrote:Speaking of which, there's a nice informative thread at SDN about the Death Star, with passages from the book.

It is interesting:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=50

Go read it, you'll like it (and I am serious, it is worth it).
Of course, because there's gems, like Illuminatus Primus.

"I'd just ignore it. This is obviously inconsistent dumbshit. Really, these dumbasses should take it from Curtis' site or stay out of the science altogether."

I felt warm, tingly and squishy inside after reading that. Vehrec's post on page 2 was also fuzzy feeling making.

[hugs bed's down comforter]

His work on page 3 is wonderful:
The temptation to use it's outer hull as a city my be difficult to resist in the long term.
Are you fucking shitting me?! It's a battle station, not a strip mall.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


[Interior double TL stand]

TL barrels have been removed, replaced with half circle window boxes. A stormtrooper is water the plants. A second stormtrooper comes up behind him and stops and hugs him from behind.

First Stormtrooper: "What are you doing?!"

[FS straightens up and turns around; Second ST lets go, putting his hands up]

Second Sormtrooper: "Sorry, John. Sorry. I thought you were Marsha."
FS: "Does it look like I've got boobs?"
SS: "I've seen you in the locker room. You need to work your pecs more."
FS: "My armor should have given it away."
SS: "They stopped making women specific armor."
FS: "Am I built like a woman?"
SS: "You have wide hips."
FS: "Bite me, okay, Eric."
SS: "Look, we were gonna take some probe droids and play some baseball outside. You want to come?"
FS: "Yeah, no. I'm not being the catcher. You threw the droid at my balls after you turned off its power."
SS: "Fine. What are you doing here? Did you grow these?"
FS: "Yeah, they're coming along great. No sunlight, no air and they're just thriving like you wouldn't believe."
SS: "You bought plastic flowers, didn't you?"

[FS drops his head]

FS: Yes.

[probe droid crashes through one of the window boxes, hitting the first stormtrooper on the back of the head; his helmet flies off and he starts gasping for air without making a sound; second stormtrooper grabs the helmet, as it floats in front of him and barely pushes it onto his head, covering his eyes; first stormtrooper starts breathing normally]

FS: "I'm glaring at you right now."
SS: "I know."

[SS turns around and leaves; FS immediately drops to the floor]


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I did like Cyborg Stan's edit to his post. But, there are certain ones I'd like to comment on.

Connor MacLeod
Hell, undert his idea superlasers can have a multi-dimesnional "hyperspacE" effect which SW shields must be expected to block. It's still got the raw energy, its just got an odd mechanism added to it.
Yes, the rebel ships at Endor really beat back the SL strikes, not with shields, remember. They did it by making the whole ship be entirely ablative armor.
And if the trektards want to haul this out, we just point out that the multi-dimensional implications would prove that ST shields can't block superlasers (or turbolasers, since they're related technologies.)
While I'm ignoring the scaling up/down assumption, I'd say no to this idea on the basis of what I wrote in this thread here:

http://www.subspace-comms.net/index.php?topic=1910.0
I am also going to bloody point out that based on the Alderaan destruction bit, it indicates that Hypermatter reactions seem to be as efficient or MORE efficient than annihilation reactions
More efficient energy usage often comes from techie methodologies.
which ACTUALLY allows us to more precisely calculate the power output of the ROTS ICS vessels
Only in the broad strokes sense of not being specific. All the SL is apparently doing for the most part is just opening hyperspace to real space, allowing the energy to come through.



ArcturusMengsk is pulling stuff out of the air with 'Here it is obvious that he speaks of the Death Star's tributary beams, and consequentially by 'large asteroid' must mean something dozens or hundreds of kilometers in diameter.'


Darth Yoshi was getting desperate on page 3.

watchdog
Jedi Knight
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:26 am
Location: Not at home

Post by watchdog » Sat Oct 20, 2007 9:33 pm

Interesting, what I am wondering is where the idea that te DS superlaser is just a big turbolaser? The thing doesnt act like any of the turbolasers we've ever seen, there have, however been single beam weapons seen in wars that seemed more like phasers, that beam fired by the star destroyer in the opening battle of ROTS for instance. It even had a sound similar to a phaser and sliced through the enemy ship with ease.
Obviously it is not a phaser as Lucas isn't going to do something like that, but does anyone know exactly what that weapon was supposed to be? Also there were the troop landing craft in AOTC which had a ball turret gun that fired beams similar to the DS beam, I got the impression that Lucas wanted to show the origin of the superlaser beam, but that beam did not create much destruction only seemed to kick up a lot of dust.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:23 pm

We're lacking the full context, though it's still kind of him to provide these quotes.
But the sentence starts by "... Beams of...".
"... Beams of coherent particles, such as electrons, positrons, and the like, as well as amplified photon emissions, are often focused with large magnetic rings. Let us postulate that one could, in this fashion, generate a weaponized beam with enough force to blow a large asteroid apart with a single blast."
They're talking about what they could do with one beam. Just one. Or more precisely, "a" beam.

Now, were they already thinking about using focused beams, instead of just one, is the real question.
The first option means they were talking about tributary cannons, the second option means they were, or he was, talking about the whole final beam.

Again, without the context, it's hard to know where their little discussion was up to at this point, nor if they were doing so at the beginning of the Great Weapon, or in its later stages.
I mean, initially, it could have been that the Death Star would only use one single beam. Maybe later they realized that they needed to divive it (same energy, divided by 8-9 beams). Or use several instances of the same initial beam (same planed initial energy, multipled 8-9 times).

On the ICS's blueprint, we see that the large power core at the center of the station, which seems to be really that, a core, not a room housing a much smaller core like in the DS2, is directly dumping the energy it generates into the main tunnel, the one that finally gives the superlaser's direction, but which initially fires invisible energy.

There would be no point in focusing eight beams into a single one, if the main one wasn't providing the largest amount of energy. Considering the size of the central core, it's all the more logical.
Otherwise, they'd just fire each beam separately.
On the other hand, if the main hole was used to release a beam of invisible stuff, the tributaries wouldn't be useful.

As for the "large asteroid" part, considering that just after that, the same person (is it?) talks about small moon neede to house such a weapon, it would seem that this "large asteroid" can be bigger than a small moon.

So it's pretty hard to settle it in any way. The conservative interpretation will be that he adressed the firepower of the whole super weapon, while the high end figure will argue that the firepower talked about was that of one single beam only.

One thing for sure is that in the functional Death Star, according to the ICS, the tributary beams were actually only used to divert power from the main conduit. They were, in simpler terms, powered by the same main reactor, at the core of the station.

So it, above all, greatly depends on when this discussion happened.
"Is there such a thing?"

"In theory, yes, though it requires a power source so large as to be impractical to perambulate, even on a Star Destroyer. But," Balahteez continued, raising one phalange in emphasis, "aboard something the size of, say, a small moon, one could easily install and house such a mechanism."
So let's see. The guy says such a beam can exist, but it would require a power core that even a Star Destroyer coudn't realistically carry.
Again, are we in the brainstorm phase? Did the final plan end being billions times more powerful?

The final reactor was extremely huge.

----

Sidenote: the DS2's reactor was extremely small in comparison. Something like less than 600 meters wide.
Yet, the novelisation says that the new station was "more than twice as powerful".
If powerful refers to the final effect, could it mean that they found a way to extract even more energy out of that hyperspace rift, while they reduced the initial raw energy provision?

---
Let us say, for the sake of argument, that the battle station under construction is large enough to hold, oh, six or eight such weapons, as well as a hypermatter reactor that could power a small planet. And that it is possible to focus all of this energy into a single beam - by the largest and most powerful magnetic ring every made."
Thus we know that the discussion occured during the construction stage. So it's not really a brainstorm, but more a theatrical way of enumerating what the station will be able to achieve.
Kind of a presentation, without a powerpoint.

It is also clear, imo, that beforehand, Balahteez was talking of one beam only. Then, he clearly says that six or eight of them could be put on the station, with an hypermatter reactor to power them.

The magnetic ring is likely related to the lens' circumference, which creates a conical magnetic field I suppose, or something, that concentrates all beams until the "soup" is ready to be accelerated towards the target.

Note, however, the curious part about the hypermatter reactor.

It is said that this hypermatter reactor could power a small planet, like if anything below could not.
This could swing both ways, but I hardly believe that a standard small planet in Star Wars would have power requirements that would near e32 watts. Even a fraction of that. It's just absurd.

What that would mean is that if you wanted on single reactor to power such a small planet, you'd need an hypermatter reactor of that size. The most curious idea is that since a planet's power requirement, say Alderaan, Naboo or Geonosis, well, any planet that has several cities but is not Coruscant (the oddball in that galaxy), can hardly even near a fraction of e32 joules, it would suggest that the power core would not output enough energy to destroy the planet the way it did... which would explain why the first explosion only torched the facing hemisphere surface and pked a hole in the planet, and why only the side effect, related to the hyperspace rift, blew it up in the secondary explosion.

However, apparently the book also says that the reactor generated the equivalent of weeks of what a main sequence star outputs.
Even aiming for the lowest energy output, it still provides insane figures, up to the point where you wonder what the hell the inhabitants of such planets could be doing with that!

This point requires more exploration, but it's very bizarre.





Watchdog:

This comes from an EU guide which said that a superlaser was a turbolaser on steroids, or something.
There's also a new EU reference about how a Venator-class ship could have superlasers mounted around its hangar bay to shoot other ships (blue beam in ROTJ). Of course, if it's found in the ROTJ:ICS, this would be just an attempt to solidify this idea.
This is also fueled by the small spheres mounted on the LAATs, sort of mini Death Stars.
However, all of these weapons have nothing to do with how a true superlaser works.
Besides, this whole EU stuff completely neglected the old and highly canonical description of the bizarre beam mechanism, provided in the novelization. If the information had been properly considered and forwarded to the authors back then, there would have never been such an idea that a superlaser was a turbolaser with big balls.

The new book shows that at this point, it's much about theories and postulates.
The hyperspace related technobabble effect is just there to show that the true superlaser is not a mere turbolaser.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:24 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:However, apparently the book also says that the reactor generated the equivalent of weeks of what a main sequence star outputs.
Even aiming for the lowest energy output, it still provides insane figures, up to the point where you wonder what the hell the inhabitants of such planets could be doing with that!
You've forgotten about the shitload of droids everywhere. :-P

Post Reply