Mojo: SW Canon

[Mr. Oragahn]

Watchdog,

The scene is a bit misleading however as the story this scene comes from had Vader wanting rebel prisoners and the gunner had simpathies for the rebellion and purpouslly killed everyone to keep Vader from having any prisoners. But still the two pics are rather telling.

One could easily argue, from there, that the guns were dialed down.
Still, good scans there. :) I've never seen the one about the asteroids being destroyed.




Mojo

I appreciate everyone responding, it was very interesting reading. Unfortunately I'm not anywhere near good enough yet to have valid arguments against your responses, and at this point I wouldn't even try, because watchdog has just changed my mind. Those two comparison shots have convinced me the ICS is bogus. Well done, man. It made me laugh out loud at the same time.

While some of the ICS stuff is definitively bogus, you still need to weigh the oppositiion's arguments as well.

Unfortunately, we again do not to see the actual material from the back of the card. Is that Dankayo? If it is, it does not even seem to have an atmosphere at all, regardless of any bombardment. But here is what the actual "Scavenger Hunt" material had to say about the Dankayo BDZ incident:


"... to rendezvous at Dankayo and reduce the tiny base to molten slag. Even before the last of its atmosphere drifted away, before the dense clouds of atomized topsoil could begin to settle, Imperial transports Elusive and Timely, as well as a complement of TIE fighters, moved in to perform "mop-up" operations and a thorough search of Dankayo's now evenly-cratered surface."
-- Scavenger Hunt, p.3


As you can see, there is quite a bit of room for interpretation. Not suprisingly, Saxton goes for the most wanked out one he can manage. There is nothing here that tells us about Dankayo as a planet, and there is room enough to suggest that the atmosphere that is drifting away is from the base (the only thing "slagged" during the operation) itself. The fact that TIEs and troops were needed for mop-up ops suggests that the crust of the planet survived more intact than some would have us believe.
-Mike

An EU source apparently says that Dankayo was used to introduce the magma troopers, and that it was a planet. Info from Wookieepedia.
Yet, it fails at citing the source. It is even more strange that for the number of BDZ and mop ups the imperials have executed, there's only two planets associated to those troopers: Dankayo (again, what source makes it a planet?) and Mustafar, a world we know does not strictly require magmaproof gear to be visited.

But it utterly fails at sticking with logic here. If the surface of that world was so badly damaged, what's the point of sending mop up forces and TIEs to patrol the surface, while the target was the rebel base, and when only the tiny rebel base was described as slagged.

I won't write you a tirade about how any rebel stuck in the bowels of the base would die soon or later anyway. Crushed structures, cracked earth and magma filling corridors and covering the world's surface... what's the point?

What's the point sending troops down in that mess, after all is nothing more than lava, instead of just patrolling the rest of the planet and blasting craters here and there, on suspicious reliefs?

I mean, that's like saying "oh, well, I know the Death Star's plans are somewhere on Alderaan, so first I'll blast it to bits, and then send ships and troopers in zero-suit to find them and look for any survivors."

Besides, there's the simple fact that all rebel ships had escaped. So that old tired "zero-escape" argument of a super fast procedure to prevent escapees does not apply here. TIEs were sent even after the damn bombardment.

Besides, there's obviously a measure of parsimony to apply here. The quote says that the rebel base was slagged. Yet, we know that there was at least one surviving tech (agent ZNT-8 I think), stuck in the lowest level of the base.
Besides, the imperials did recover datapacks.
So obviously, not all the base was slagged.
But I see it's okay to assume that for no valid reason, the whole world's surface was turned to lava.

I dealt with a Darth Timon guy who unwillingly represented the fanatical warsie side of the debate, in the following thread (brings you at page 12). Here, I also pointed out the absurdity of claiming that this ball of cheese is supposed to be a planet, with an atmosphere.

[watchdog]

Mr. Oragahn the forum debate you linked to reminded me of one from long ago at SB.com;
http://forums.spacebattles.com/showthread.php?t=18860
Many of my favorite points were made by my favorite poster there IXjac.
There were also some good points made at an earlier thread there;
http://forums.spacebattles.com/showthread.php?t=17090
Any thoughts?

[Mr. Oragahn]

Looking at the first thread.

Well, everything was going well and being reasonable at first.
That said, one could say, from the other side of the spectrum, that the thread thus far, was absurdly nerfing the BDZ concept.
But at least, such a discussion was possible, back in 2001, because there was no ICS to hide behind.

We see HSD asking people to look at Young's turbolaser page. It's really a shit that apparently no one really went against that page before it spread roots of misinformation well too far.

IXJac... a voice of moderation... moderating SB.com. You can actually feel the difference when people like him and E1907whatever the number were runnin' the shop.

The quotes on the bombardment of Khomm are also very interesting to notice. Especially since it was made to "make it memorable".

Various calls from HDS to throw that book out.

It's really funny that one of the most descriptive books, in fact, is openly asked to be ignored.

Nevermind another book mentionning ISDs, frigates and space stations exchanging terajoules of firepower.
Nevermind Vector Prime clearly putting a cap on an ISD firepower, and pointing out to absolutely sub gigaton firepower.

There's also that claim from wikipedia:

"Interdictor Cruisers built by both the Republic and the Sith possessed 20 quad laser cannons for short range defense, 4 turbolasers, 2 ion cannons, a tractor beam projector, and 4 gravity well generators. That was an inordinately large amount of firepower for a vessel of that size and classification and of that era. An Old Republic Interdictor Cruiser could outgun the Interdictor-class heavy cruiser built in the Galactic Civil War by Kuat Drive Yards."

And we've seen the amount of damage a fleet of such Sith Interdictors managed to put on Taris' upper city:
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Taris

http://images1.wikia.com/starwars/image ... troyed.jpg (gosh, that cinematic sequence was horrible - made me regret the times of the first Jedi Kinght!)

Sub kiloton stuff.

It would seem that Darksaber has its very low low end moments regarding VSD firepower - of course, the figures could be upped if the first targeted cities were particularily superlarge, as it's going to requier a heck of kiloton level bolts to slag the entirety of a city like NY and all its surrounding suburbs - but globally it's averaged with superior megaton figures, and you always return to yields from kilotons to, at best, mid megatons.
Darksaber clearly put the VSDs as particularily weak ships, outrageously outmatched by a few star destroyers.
Which is funny, when you think about the claims and retconning that went on, about the era these VSDs belong to, and the day they first emerged from spacedocks.

[Mike DiCenso]

Mr. Oragahn wrote:

Looking at the first thread.

Well, everything was going well and being reasonable at first.
That said, one could say, from the other side of the spectrum, that the thread thus far, was absurdly nerfing the BDZ concept.
But at least, such a discussion was possible, back in 2001, because there was no ICS to hide behind.

Yeah, that's a common thread I've noticed from many debators today, that the AOTC ICS essentially killed the debate, at least from an Trek versus Wars viewpoint. When I read old threads like this, combined with the information Darkstar (Robert Anderson) provides in his expose' here:

http://www.st-v-sw.net/Warsiegroup.html

...it really makes me think that the dammed book was written specifically to quell this kind of debate. The ROTS ICS tried to go in the same direction the AOTC one did, but it seems, for whatever reason, that direct power quotes were cut from the final version, though some indirect wanking managed to slip past the editing process.

The real sad part about it all is that the AOTC ICS didn't actually change things all that much in truth. But sadly, people involved in the debates could not see past the spin.

We see HSD asking people to look at Young's turbolaser page. It's really a shit that apparently no one really went against that page before it spread roots of misinformation well too far.

That was still back before reliable high-definition DVDs were readily available, though there was still the possibility of getting reasonable quality screencaps off of the SE videotapes of the entire Falcon/Avenger chase sequence, which would have put down the mistaken notion of the flak bursts being vaporized asteroids.

IXJac... a voice of moderation... moderating SB.com. You can actually feel the difference when people like him and E1907whatever the number were runnin' the shop.

Yup, those where the days...
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Mr. Oragahn wrote:

An EU source apparently says that Dankayo was used to introduce the magma troopers, and that it was a planet. Info from Wookieepedia.
Yet, it fails at citing the source. It is even more strange that for the number of BDZ and mop ups the imperials have executed, there's only two planets associated to those troopers: Dankayo (again, what source makes it a planet?) and Mustafar, a world we know does not strictly require magmaproof gear to be visited.

Yes, we know that it was supposed to be a planet, as per the Scavenger Hunt quote I posted. But the particulars of the planet are never given. Certainly a dwarf planet could be still considered, and even a terrestrial planet smaller than Earth, Venus or even Mars, might still be possible as well. We just have little information, and the Wookipedia information being compromised by obvious elements of the Pro-Wars debators and Saxtonites does not go towards helping get to the truth of the matter, either.
-Mike

[watchdog]

Spacebattles around this time was when I got introduced to it, back when I had to do all my surfing at local libraries. the pages posted were not the one I really wanted to post, that was from January 2001. the archive appears to begin at May 2001. The page I was looking for was the response to Wayne Poe's response to IXjac's BDZ post back at ASVS(Wayne Poes response to BDZ), it apparently only exists now in the printed copy I made years ago, yes I used to print out whole threads to read at my liesure.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Spacebattles around this time was when I got introduced to it, back when I had to do all my surfing at local libraries. the pages posted were not the one I really wanted to post, that was from January 2001. the archive appears to begin at May 2001. The page I was looking for was the response to Wayne Poe's response to IXjac's BDZ post back at ASVS(Wayne Poes response to BDZ), it apparently only exists now in the printed copy I made years ago, yes I used to print out whole threads to read at my liesure.

Funny, that's not a bad idea.
I do happen, from time to time, to save the pages of threads that I deem good. Of course, there are many that I don't archvie, because I rely on the forums to keep archvies themselves, and it would be terrible to loose all that stuff, really - I kno wwhat I speak of, I've seen it happen on an AVP forum, and years of passionated and well documented debate went down the flush, while other absurd sections of the boards were kept.

Makes me think about it... isn't there a function, on bulletin boards, to save and archive all threads in a way that they could be easily "readable" like traditionnal web pages.

Yeah, that's a common thread I've noticed from many debators today, that the AOTC ICS essentially killed the debate, at least from an Trek versus Wars viewpoint. When I read old threads like this, combined with the information Darkstar (Robert Anderson) provides in his expose' here:

http://www.st-v-sw.net/Warsiegroup.html

...it really makes me think that the dammed book was written specifically to quell this kind of debate. The ROTS ICS tried to go in the same direction the AOTC one did, but it seems, for whatever reason, that direct power quotes were cut from the final version, though some indirect wanking managed to slip past the editing process.

The real sad part about it all is that the AOTC ICS didn't actually change things all that much in truth. But sadly, people involved in the debates could not see past the spin.

It's obvious, of course. Only the defenders of this book would not admit it, despite how glaring it is.
That's why there are members who are actually interested in running debates on bases that predates the AOTC ICS by far. It's an interesting phenomenom, which really illustrates how people are actually wishing to drop some irrational stuff out, to return to more creative and enjoyable situations.

That was still back before reliable high-definition DVDs were readily available, though there was still the possibility of getting reasonable quality screencaps off of the SE videotapes of the entire Falcon/Avenger chase sequence, which would have put down the mistaken notion of the flak bursts being vaporized asteroids.

Well, I don't know for the others, but the first time I saw his page, I think around 02, I was really flabergasted by the sheer amount of error.
I had the old edition and SE on tape, I was watching one of them every two months or so. Spotting the fact that many asteroids identified on this page were just pure invention was not hard.
I remember ever pointing this out, with heavy words, at spacebattles, and this got the attention of both wongies and other people, who actually appreciated my move and admited they wish they had the gall to say it - I mean, wtf? the balls to speak the truth about something as trivial as this??
What's that? There were Inquisitors or a Gestapo agents lurking around or what?

[Mr. Oragahn]

Reading the second thread.

I think I love Fenris Ulfric. I had the same idea regarding destroy underwater targets. Not only the poisoning of TLs is proven in the EU, but it is also precisely known, since Zahn's trilogy (and Jedi Kinght games) that blasters bolts and turbolaser bolts can hit deep in the water without getting diffused at all.
This helps to point out how you don't need to boil off the oceans to destroy key targets on the seabed.

That said, we have a BDZ thread, here.

It slightly derailed about estimations of how many shield generators would actually be needed to cover the entirety of Endor, but the discussion can be resumed any time.

There were interesting quotes. Notably one, actually incredible:

And in Edge Of Victory I, Jacen states that "Boster preaty much slaged the place"....when nothing of the sort happened. Its just a statement people in SW throw around to show massive destruction, like we do today.

Which offers a whole new perspective on how "slag" can be used in Star Wars, notably as some sort of slang. But of course, there are those guides' descriptions which don't seem to be about slang at all.

Other people, notably IXJac, don't hesitate to remind people that even megaton blasts can make stone run like water. That said, I think this should als be possible with kiloton blasts. As long as you fire on a spot, you'll obtain these effects.

A comment of choice:

In the case of the original source, the WEG Imperial sourcebook, the reference isn't techical. As much is stated on the inside cover, which points out that the information within is sketchy and incomplete, and is only a rough primer on the Empire, not absolute fact and concrete figures. It is in fact explicitly stated not to be a technical document: ". . .this report should be considered high level rumour at best."

As for "slag" it goes deeper than just slang, though that is an argument too. For instance, if I take a glass and melt 30% of it, you could claim to have "melted" it and no-one would disagree - yet 70% of the material is not melted. What has been missed in so many over-clinical interpretations in search of vast power figures is that for something to be described as "burnt", "melted", "scorched", "slagged" etc. there is absolutely no requirement for the entirety of the object or area described to be so affected.


As stated previously, I bleive any slagging is simply a byproduct of other destruction, not the intended effect. Much in the same way the slagging of a limited area of a city hit by a nuke is just a byproduct of the fireball, not the primary intended means of the city's destruction.

Reminds me of how Darth Timon used to strictly consider that if "surface" was mentionned, it had to mean all the surface. That false dilemna would get quickly tiring.
When a meteor strikes the surface of a planet, it doesn't mean it hit *all* the surface. It only hit the element called "surface", somewhere.
When you damage something, you don't damage every single portion of the whole thing. You damage a percentage of the thing, but since it is identified a whole, the whole entity is considered damaged.

The rest falls in a sort of tired and unsettable dispute about what the ANH quotes mean.

One last one, still relevant to the "slag" issue:

Just a comment on the use of the word slag (having worked in the metals industry for a number of years):

Slag is not, outside of a very specific context (the refining of metals) a technical term--within the context it does represent a specific material, resulting from a specific process (the purification of metals/metallic ores under heat). It is essentially the waste product..... and in many cases (depending upon the particular metals and processes, as well as the nature of the impurities) the slag is a mixture of vitreous and carbonated materials.. the melting is not complete.

Used outside of that context, it is simply slang--representing materials that have been affected (possibly melted, but not necessarily) by high heat. It does not represent a precise condition or a particular material (indeed, much of the top meter of a planet cannot be reduced to slag, because of its chemical composition... the bio-matter that constitutes a significant portion of the soil will simply combust or carbonize).

The debates ends on a final long suite of fuller quotes from Darksaber, reported by rvalencia, which may suggest that the VSDs, during the attack of Khomm, didn't use maximum yields - but this requires a look at a few sentences.

[Lord Edam]

To clear up a few things.

The trading card image of a VSD over a rocky body. The back of the trading card says

Rendili Stardrive Victory-class Star Destroyer. The precursor to the Imperial Star Destroyer, a Victory Star Destroyer is equipped with 10 quad turbolasers, 40 double turbolasers, 80 concussion missile tubes and 10 tractor beam projectors; its hangar bays carry 24 TIE fighters. While Victory Star Destroyers cannot compete with modern Imperial Star Destroyers in space combat, they excel at planetary engagements because they can fly in an atmosphere and conduct planetary bombardments from a very low altitude

The planet in the trading card image was never intended to be Dankayo, nor is any reference made to the operation being a "BDZ".


There are no images of Dankayo's surface following the attempt by 3 ISDs to turn the tiny base into slag, only the description given by the one rebel remaining who describes a largely intact base and the opening narrative for the adventure, part of which includes

"what they found there surprised them. Not a single being, living or dead was discovered on the planet"
...
"rubble of our defensive installations"
...
"doors to an intact chamber in the main base"



There is no evidence specialist troops were used on Dankayo. The fact the sole surviving rebel can survive on the surface with out mention of magma-proof equipment kind of destroys that assumption.

The fact the sole surviving rebel is able to survive on the surface after the last of the air has drifted away does suggest it is an airless rock in the first place (why else would he know he needed breathing equipment?)

[watchdog]

To clear up a few things.

The trading card image of a VSD over a rocky body. The back of the trading card says

Rendili Stardrive Victory-class Star Destroyer. The precursor to the Imperial Star Destroyer, a Victory Star Destroyer is equipped with 10 quad turbolasers, 40 double turbolasers, 80 concussion missile tubes and 10 tractor beam projectors; its hangar bays carry 24 TIE fighters. While Victory Star Destroyers cannot compete with modern Imperial Star Destroyers in space combat, they excel at planetary engagements because they can fly in an atmosphere and conduct planetary bombardments from a very low altitude

The planet in the trading card image was never intended to be Dankayo, nor is any reference made to the operation being a "BDZ".


There are no images of Dankayo's surface following the attempt by 3 ISDs to turn the tiny base into slag, only the description given by the one rebel remaining who describes a largely intact base and the opening narrative for the adventure, part of which includes

"what they found there surprised them. Not a single being, living or dead was discovered on the planet"
...
"rubble of our defensive installations"
...
"doors to an intact chamber in the main base"



There is no evidence specialist troops were used on Dankayo. The fact the sole surviving rebel can survive on the surface with out mention of magma-proof equipment kind of destroys that assumption.

The fact the sole surviving rebel is able to survive on the surface after the last of the air has drifted away does suggest it is an airless rock in the first place (why else would he know he needed breathing equipment?)

I cant help but wonder why so many warsies claimed that was the planet Dankayo then, this image has been around long enough for someone to clear up this mistake.

[Mike DiCenso]

I hate to be so cynical, but you have to ask why they would bother correcting a misconception that in their view only helps to reinforce their version of SW weapon firepower, even if means having to maintain a dishonest facade in the process?

By the way, thanks for providing the missing other half of the card, Edam. I knew that planet(oid) wasn't Dankayo.
-Mike

[GStone]

I hate to be so cynical, but you have to ask they would bother correcting a misconception that in their view only helps to reinforce their version of SW weapon firepower, even if means having to maintain a dishonest facade in the process?

To see who would blink first. ;-P

[Mr. Oragahn]

" Rendili Stardrive Victory-class Star Destroyer. The precursor to the Imperial Star Destroyer, a Victory Star Destroyer is equipped with 10 quad turbolasers, 40 double turbolasers, 80 concussion missile tubes and 10 tractor beam projectors; its hangar bays carry 24 TIE fighters. While Victory Star Destroyers cannot compete with modern Imperial Star Destroyers in space combat, they excel at planetary engagements because they can fly in an atmosphere and conduct planetary bombardments from a very low altitude "

So a ship that can't enter the atmosphere of a planet is much less efficient at hitting the sitting duck targets?
:|

[Praeothmin]

Mr. Oraghan wrote:

So a ship that can't enter the atmosphere of a planet is much less efficient at hitting the sitting duck targets?
:|

Maybe it's because it is better at geting under theater shields, like on Hoth.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Mr. Oraghan wrote:

So a ship that can't enter the atmosphere of a planet is much less efficient at hitting the sitting duck targets?
:|

Maybe it's because it is better at geting under theater shields, like on Hoth.

Somehow, I don't think a VSD could get under a theater shield, even less if it's already raised.
The explanation really strongly suggests that by getting closer to its target, a VSD has a good advantage here.

What could it be?

More firepower? That would mean that bolts fade out over short distances.
More accuracy? Imho this is what's implied.
More... escape hampering? Why being in the atmosphere would help the VSD forbid more escapes?

Besides, you got to appreciate the description from the old EU, pre retcon.

VSD being the direct ancestors to ISDs, and only being the ones able to fly so low. When you think of it, considering the accelerations the ISDs are capable, but even more considering the power sources such as the ICS gives them, they shouldn't have much trouble going so low in the atmosphere...