I should probably have left my commentary at the point of analog broadcast downloading (a post which I believe to be a shockingly non-verbose and pointed one given my usual standards of verbose over-completeness), but alas . . .
Being senile, I was looking to see what I actually had on the site in reference to the Dodonna quote. I skimmed the
Death Star Research Project area and didn't see it at all. Applying Google-fu, I found that discussion of that quote is on the page about
Imperial Fleet Size in Star Wars.
Basically, both logic and the lesser canon (most especially the novelization) point to the use of "firepower" in reference to not-the-superlaser.
I then made the mistake of deciding to see what he said, even though I was smart enough to know better the other day. Yep, bad plan on my part.
For starters, he just argues from personal incredulity for the first little bit, repeating that the aforementioned logic and canon "makes no sense" (to him). He then gets ridiculously semantic by noting that there is a period between "firepower greater than half the starfleet" and "it's defenses are designed around", as if somehow the whole topic changed in mid-stride.
Then he finally uses a battleship as an example, an analogy which Nowhereman already pointed out the issues with, but which I wish to expand upon.
I have used a WW2 analogy before on this topic, to wit:
Dodonna is briefing his pilots in regards to the defenses of the Death Star. Superlaser info would be tactically irrelevant during a such a tactical briefing. The situation would be analogous to telling a 1940's Luftwaffe pilot about the total yield of a bomb load of a B-17, or a Japanese pilot sent against the plane that bombed Nagasaki about the yield of the "Fat Man" bomb. The pilots already knew the superlaser could destroy a planet, just as the Axis pilots would know that the B-17 could wax a bridge, or that the B-29's atomic bomb could blast a city to rubble. What a pilot would need to know about is the number and calibre of guns aboard, since the whole idea is to survive and shoot the enemy down. "The B-17 carries a firepower greater than half a fighter squadron" (or some such similar phrasing) would make the most sense, by analogy.
The view that by "firepower" Dodonna refers to the Death Star's turbolasers is also supported by chapter 11 of the ANH novelization. Later in the briefing, Dodonna makes the following comment . . . note the usage of the term:
"Take special note of these emplacements. There's a heavy concentration of firepower on the latitudinal axes, was well as several dense circumpolar clusters."
If Dodonna were referring to the superlaser along with the Death Star's defensive weapons when he referred to firepower earlier, then this use of "heavy concentration of firepower" would be akin to referring to a dense concentration of water vapor or a thick cloud, while ignoring the hurricane sitting beside it. It is obvious that he refers to the defensive turbolasers of the Death Star.
The question is, which is a better analogy . . . a bomber armed also with defensive weapons, or a battleship loaded with guns of many sizes, from the large primary artillery-style cannons to the smaller anti-aircraft weapons.
I consider it fairly obvious that the bomber is the preferred analogy. Or, if you prefer to keep it naval, then a guided missile cruiser which can launch missiles against surface targets but which also has other anti-ship (and anti-air) weaponry aboard. If you have to take out this boat, you don't need to know the yield of her cruise missiles in reference to your attack.
Witness further the military doctrines of the Clone Wars, in which planetary attack is exclusively accomplished by landing troops, with landing craft and fighters being deployed from vessels in orbit or even within the atmosphere.
Or, I'll simply quote myself again, this time from the Superlaser Effect synthesis page, written long before we saw the Clone Wars depicted:
The Death Stars attacked worlds in an entirely new way. Not only was capture of the planet no longer a goal, but in addition the ranges and energies involved were of a level never before seen.
Instead of enemy attack ships, fighters, bombers, and landing craft (carrying soldiers and occupation personnel) trying to fight their way into orbit or onto the surface, the Death Star simply fired its superweapon from long range. As a result, the common forms of planetary defense . . . fighters, defense fleets, surface-based weapons installations, orbital platforms, and small theater shields . . . were rendered wholly obsolete.
As analogy, ponder the age of castles. Long ago, a castle was thought to be an impenetrable fortress . . . you couldn't hope to destroy it, and that wasn't your goal anyway . . . you wanted its defenses and riches for yourself. Now imagine that you have decided to get hardcore on the castle occupants, and no longer want their castle . . . just their deaths. Further, you have acquired an F-15 with a full suite of bombs. The castle will be destroyed in short order. It defeats the castle defenses by attacking in a totally new way . . . i.e. from the air. The defenders of the castle would be totally unprepared for this . . . they'd have men in the battlements with arrows, stones, and hot oil to rain down upon you. They'd be prepared for seige engines and wall-breaking. A fighter dropping death from above would blow their minds, not only for the technology but also for the change of tactics and goals.
A more sci-fi analogy would be to refer to planetary bombardment versus invasion with troops and tanks. Or, one could ponder the Battle of Britain or V-2 rockets, which showed air power nullifying Britain's defensive advantages of a powerful navy and separation from the continent by water by utterly bypassing those surface-based advantages.
Similarly, the ion cannons, orbital platforms, fighters, starships, and so on that would logically comprise the majority of a major world's defenses in Star Wars are rendered useless by the long-range, one-shot-billions-killed superlaser. It lacks the finesse of a well-coordinated fleet assault on an enemy world, but makes up for it by sheer utility. If I were the F-15 pilot, I'd certainly conclude that my demonstration "was as impressive as it was thorough", especially to those residing in other castles.
The Death Star was a weapon of sheer terror . . . there was no defense against it, and that was the point.
The Death Star was not to planets as an F-15 would be to Medieval-equipped castles, however. Instead, it is more like if the atomic bomb had required a much larger aircraft to carry it, something on par with an airship in scale. If you are part of a Japanese fighter squadron that already knows this new aircraft carries a weapon capable of annihilating a city, and you are tasked with bringing this airship down, then when briefed you do not need to know that has sufficient firepower to destroy a city . . . you need to be told of its air defenses. That is precisely what Dodonna is doing.
As for the rest of the video? Well, to be honest, the absurdity up to that point, plus his feigned incredulity and exasperation on the topic, were simply too much to bear, so I didn't get any further than the battleship picture.